I see what you mean. That might be the short term play but I see Sessions move as a cold, calculated move on the chessboard to force the issue to seek a resolution in the long term play.
We can't have states saying it's perfectly legal and fed's saying it's not, we need a black and white line defined in law. So he presses the fed side which should galvanize the public to either be for or against removal of fed law in regards to MMJ (or recreational); still leaves the states to decide their own views, but it removes the fed responsibility to chase low-level MMJ junk/distractions. That may just mean the line is drawn where fed's worry about prosecuting only other drugs (heroin, crack, etc) instead, but that's exactly the direction the DOJ is trying to ferret out by demonstrating the strong-arm one side of enforcement. They need to determine what the right marching orders should be. It'll be a nightmare if the line starts falling on amounts of harvest or weights or other "middle of the road" quantifiers. I can understand exactly why the feds don't like being caught between a rock and a hard place...or the People and outdated Law. They just want clear direction of whether it's good or bad so they can apply resources accordingly. Which is why the message of congress giving DOJ exactly $0 ZERO dollars for MMJ enforcement is so relevant to the discussion.
So once again the MMJ market "may" have short term uncertainty, but long term it's looking real good from state, fed and international views. Now the hard part...patience. :-)
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
