The use of marijuana can be viewed as one of the most debatable and controversial elements of the U.S. criminal justice agenda. Despite the fact that a range of regulations have been passed regarding the subject matter, the issue still remains rather complicated. At present, the use of medicinal marijuana is allowed in 23 States of America (23 legal medical marijuana states and DC, 2015); therefore, the struggle for making medicinal cannabis legal is far from being over.
A range of laws and regulations have shaped the legal policy regarding the use of marijuana over the past few decades (Benmaamar, 2014). However, when it comes to defining the groundbreaking court rulings that redefined the very approach towards marijuana use, one must mention the Jenks v. State of Florida (1991).
As it has been stressed above, the law has been modified significantly since its adoption in 1991; the changes that occurred to the specified regulation can be described as moving towards a more democratic interpretation of the subject matter, as the use of marijuana has been allowed in 23 states so far (23 legal medical marijuana states and DC, 2015). Moreover, the tendency in reinforcing the democratic concept in question seems to have been growing consistently; therefore, it is expected that the consumption of marijuana will be allowed in other states as well (Becker, 2015).
The role of the Supreme Court in the specified case boils down to stating the conditions, in which the prescription and the following use of marijuana by the patient, can be deemed as legitimate (Benmaamar, 2014). Particularly, the Supreme Court drove the line between the lawful use of marijuana and the illegal consumption thereof. In other words, the Supreme Court practically defines the very content of the regulation to be passed and affects the rights of the citizens in a direct way, either providing the residents of the United States with the corresponding rights or restricting their actions by setting specific limitations.
Needless to say, the specified regulation has brought a significant change to the current criminal justice policy regarding the use of marijuana. First and most obvious, the limitations for marijuana use were finally set, and tracking the instances of marijuana abuse became much easier. Additionally, the necessity to provide a prescription for purchasing the above-mentioned drug helped reduce the instances of drug abuse among the residents of the United States.
The ruling passed by the jury did not reflect the significance of technology in people’s lives at the time. The fact that medicinal marijuana will be provided to patients as long as they have the corresponding prescription was not shaped by technological advances of the time in any possible way. It would be wrong to assume, though, that the issue has been resolved completely. The changes in the way, in which people communicate, as well as the technology that they use in order to acquire the necessary information, may provide additional options for the people, who are willing to break the law. Thus, further reinforcement of the existing regulations will have to be carried out. Particularly, the issue of drones use as the means of stealing from cannabis farms (Withnall, 2014) will have to be addressed.
The changes made to the U.S. legal system in terms of marijuana use have clearly affected the social justice. Particularly, the fact that the rights of the people, who suffer tremendous pain and, therefore, have no other options but to use marijuana as a painkiller, finally were recognized deserves to be mentioned. Additionally, the specified legislation helped reduce the number of possible instances of drug peddling and drug abuse by some of the representatives of the U.S. healthcare services should also be brought up. In other words, the legislation described above created premises for representing the rights of patients along with the reinforcement of preventing measures against drug peddling.
The use of marijuana has been one of the most debatable issues in the United States, and the 1991 regulation passed as a result of the Jenks v. State of Florida (1991) court ruling allowed for solving some of the dilemmas, as well as provided a solid ground for promoting the rights of the people, who need medicinal marijuana for relieving the pain. In some way, the specified ruling can be considered a step forward in allowing the use of marijuana for the rest of the citizens of the United States provided that the target audience has reached the legal age.
It is assumed that further changes to the existing set of rules and regulations regarding the use of cannabis will be altered so that patients with terminal diseases, as well the patients, who are in unbearable pain, should be provided with more rights as far as the acquisition of recreational marijuana is concerned. Additionally, it is expected that the recreational use of marijuana that does not involve any treatment should also be considered legally. Despite the fact that the subject matter has already been viewed as a topical issue to be analyzed, the final approval of the idea of recreational use of marijuana is yet to be approved by the Supreme Court (Durkin, 2014).
Reference List
23 legal medical marijuana states and DC. (2015). Web.
Becker, S. (2015). 7 states on the verge of marijuana legalization. The CheatSheet. Web.
Benmaamar, R. (2014). Colorado: a first in the USA for legal sale of marijuana. Lancet Oncology, 15(2): 55.
Durkin, A. (2014). Legalization of marijuana for non-medical use: Health, policy, socioeconomic, and nursing implications. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing & Mental Health Services, 52(9): 22–26.
Jenks v. State of Florida 582 So.2d 676 – Fla.App. 1 Dist. 1991.
Withnall, A. (2014). Criminals ‘using unmanned drones and infrared cameras to find illegal cannabis farms’ – and then steal from the growers. The Independent. Web.