H.R. 6335: States’ Medical Marijuana Property Rights Protection Act

HR 6335 IH

112th CONGRESS

2d Session

H. R. 6335

To amend the Controlled Substances Act so as to exempt real property from civil forfeiture due to medical-marijuana-related conduct that is authorized by State law.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

August 2, 2012

Ms. LEE of California (for herself, Mr. POLIS, Mr. FARR, Mr. STARK, Mr. HINCHEY, Mr. BLUMENAUER, Mr. HONDA, Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts, and Mr. MCGOVERN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned


A BILL

To amend the Controlled Substances Act so as to exempt real property from civil forfeiture due to medical-marijuana-related conduct that is authorized by State law.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ‘States’ Medical Marijuana Property Rights Protection Act’.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress makes the following findings:

      (1) 17 States and the District of Columbia have, through ballot measure or legislative action, approved the use of marijuana for medical purposes when recommended by a physician.

      (2) Marijuana has long-established medical uses as an effective treatment for conditions that include HIV/AIDS, multiple sclerosis, arthritis, gastro-intestinal disorders, chronic pain, and others as well.

SEC. 3. CIVIL FORFEITURE EXEMPTION FOR MARIJUANA FACILITIES AUTHORIZED BY STATE LAW.

    Paragraph (7) of section 511(a) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 881(a)(7)) is amended--

      (1) by striking ‘(7) All’ and inserting ‘(7)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), all’; and

      (2) by adding at the end the following:

      ‘(B) No real property, including any right, title, and interest in the whole of any lot or tract of land and any appurtenances or improvements, shall be subject to forfeiture under subparagraph (A) due to medical marijuana-related conduct that is authorized by State law.’.

CONTEXT(Help)
-
Argumentation and Debate - 62242 »Argumentation and Debate - 62242
Dylan Prosser »Dylan Prosser
Policy Presentation »Policy Presentation
Gov shouldnt seize property due to medical-marijuana-related conduct »Gov shouldnt seize property due to medical-marijuana-related conduct
H.R. 6335: States’ Medical Marijuana Property Rights Protection Act
Changing the law will prevent any further suffering »Changing the law will prevent any further suffering
Federal law conflicts with state law »Federal law conflicts with state law
Seizure of property from clinics makes people suffer.  »Seizure of property from clinics makes people suffer.
+Comments (0)
+Citations (0)
+About