Culture
Library Of Congress Highlights Racist News Coverage Used To Justify Criminalizing Marijuana A Century Ago
The Library of Congress (LOC) is documenting racist depictions of marijuana in early 20th century news coverage that helped to drive the criminalization of cannabis, highlighting sensationalized articles about the plant that the federal research body says effectively served as “anti-Mexican propaganda.”
As part of the institution’s “Chronicling America” project, which digitizes media from throughout U.S. history, LOC published a timeline last week that gives examples of headlines concerning cannabis from 1897 to 1915.
“From the late 19th to early 20th century, newspapers reported the early rise of marihuana (known today as marijuana),” the post states. “Alarming reports of the menace of marihuana reach the United States press. Tales of alleged atrocities fueled by the drug are often tied to anti-Mexican propaganda.”
On a landing page featuring links to the digitized newspaper clippings, LOC warns: “Some of the linked articles contain ethnic slurs and offensive characterizations.”
One early article on marijuana, published in The Sun in August 1897, said that the plant “continues to impel people of the lower orders to wild and desperate deeds.”
In a separate 1897 piece in the Tombstone Prospector, which reported on an alleged attempt to smuggle cannabis into a prison, marijuana is characterized as “a kind of a loco weed which is more powerful than opium.”
Via Library of Congress.
“The Mexicans mix it with tobacco and smoke it in cigarettes, which causes a hilarity not equalled by any other form of dissipation,” it continues. “When smuggled inside the prison walls the Mexicans readily pay $4 an ounce for it, but outside it is only worth about 50 cents an ounce.”
One 1887 Memphis Appeal piece ran with the shocking headline, “Senseless Brutality. A Mexican Priest Flogs the Corpse of a Dead Wizard.”
A 1904 article—titled “Dangerous Mexican Weed to Smoke”—relays a story about two people who got the “marihuana habit,” consumed cannabis and “after a few minutes ran amuck” before being hospitalized.
“It is feared that the two men, if they recover from their wounds, will lose their minds permanently, as is the case often with marihuana smokers,” the report said.
Even early articles on marijuana policy contained language that stereotyped marijuana as a “Mexican drug” or “Indian hemp,” as was the case in an El Paso Herald piece published in 1915 after the City Council approved legislation to prohibit cannabis.
The Ogden Standard in 1915 published a story that features especially racist language.
Via Library of Congress.
“Are the Mexicans becoming a mightier and braver race, or in the language of Texas, are they becoming ‘locoed?’” the article asks. “Reports received here indicate that the sudden burst of bravery on the part of the Mexicans is due to an increased use of the weed known as Marihuana, which has much the same effects as opium or morphine on its users.”
“When a Mexican is under the influence of Marihuana he imagines that he can, single-handed, whip the entire regular United States army, while if reinforced by several other Mexicans, he might include a few European nations in his dream conquests,” it continues. “While under the influence of marihuana Mexicans are liable to commit murder and when arrested give the authorities great trouble.”
Such openly racist rhetoric around cannabis has largely dissipated from news coverage in recent years as support for ending criminalization continues to grow. But as numerous policymakers have pointed out, the racial inequities associated with enforcement of prohibition laws are far from gone.
Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Cory Booker (D-NJ) discussed the role of marijuana criminalization and the broader drug war in perpetuating racial injustices last week, and they remarked on how black people are significantly more likely to be arrested for cannabis possession compared to white people despite similar rates of consumption.
Two members of the House circulated a sign-on letter last week urging fellow lawmakers to keep marijuana reform in mind as a way to further promote racial justice while they debate policing reform legislation.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom described his states’s legalization of marijuana as a “civil rights” matter earlier this month.
Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam said that the passage of cannabis decriminalization legislation this year represents an example of how his state has addressed racial inequities that are inspiring mass protests in the wake of police killings of black people such as George Floyd and Breonna Taylor.
Booker also recently said racial disparities in marijuana enforcement is an example of a systemic injustice that underlies the frustration of minority communities.
Last month, 12 House members introduced a resolution condemning police brutality and specifically noting the racial injustices of the war on drugs.
That measure came one week after 44 members of the House sent a letter to the Justice Department, calling for an independent investigation into a fatal police shooting of Taylor in a botched drug raid.
In New York, there’s a renewed push to pass a package of criminal justice reform legislation that includes a bill to legalize marijuana.
The head of a federal health agency recently acknowledged racial disparities in drug enforcement and the harm that such disparate practices have caused—and NORML asked her to go on the record to further admit that this trend in criminalization is more harmful than marijuana itself.
Biden-Sanders Task Force Members Push For Legalizing Marijuana And Other Drug Reforms
Photo courtesy of Library of Congress.
Culture
U.K. Lawyer Dons Vegan Hemp Wig As Alternative To Horsehair, Disrupting Centuries-Long Tradition
An attorney based in the U.K. is disrupting the centuries-long tradition of barristers wearing wigs made with horse hair. He wants lawyers in the country’s high courts to start donning vegan, hemp-based head coverings instead.
Samuel March first previewed the hemp wigs last year. He said that horsehair wigs that have been standard garb are outdated, and the cannabis-based version could serve as an animal-friendly and more environmentally sustainable vegan alternative to the status quo.
A closer look at the world's first plant-based barrister's wig, swapping horsehair for hemp… pic.twitter.com/jMK8WDuEMa
— Samuel March (@Sam_Oscar_March) March 6, 2021
As it stands, the hemp wig is in the “testing phase” for interested members. But he hopes it catches on.
“Hemp is a notoriously tough material so I do not anticipate there being any issues [with wear and tear], but there is always a risk where you’re the first in the world to try something,” March recently told The Telegraph. “Making them here [in the UK] on this scale and price point means my market is largely limited to vegan barristers, which is a small market—but one that I intend to keep selling to.”
Hemp & Hemp, the company March founded to supply the cannabis-based headwear, says on its website that it makes “the world’s first ever plant-based, vegan-friendly wigs for barristers.”
Intent to supply…
The world’s first plant-based wig for barristers is now available to order. It swaps horse hair for hemp and is 100% vegan friendly.
New website just dropped: https://t.co/brd2ihmdNR pic.twitter.com/brIXDLgFoG
— Samuel March (@Sam_Oscar_March) February 22, 2022
The U.K. government hasn’t been especially progressive when it comes to marijuana reform, but the country has embraced non-intoxicating hemp in varying forms over recent years.
March further recognized that hemp wigs aren’t for everyone, and he’s not trying to push it on barristers with reservations.
He said that upholding the longstanding legal tradition of wearing wigs in the first place should be made optional “for people who wear turbans, headscarves, have afro hair or any reason to feel uncomfortable dressing as a white man from the 18th century.”
I love my wig but they should be optional for people who wear turbans, headscarves, have afro hair or any reason to feel uncomfortable dressing as a white man from the 18th century. Not all barristers are eccentric white, male, privately educated former Cambridge drama students.
— Samuel March (@Sam_Oscar_March) February 24, 2022
“Not all barristers are eccentric white, male, privately educated former Cambridge drama students,” he said.
To that point, a black barrister recently criticized the “culturally insensitive” and “ridiculous” tradition of requiring lawyers to subscribe to an outmoded hair styling that requires donning horse-derived hair to appear in legal proceedings.
Leslie Thomas QC said that the wig mandate “represents and signifies the culturally insensitive climate”—an issue that came to the fore after another barrister, Michael Etienne, who has an afro, was threatened with disciplinary action if he chose not to cover it with a wig.
Quick response to some FAQs arising out of this:
🚭 No: Very sorry to disappoint those asking, but nothing in my hemp wig contravenes the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.
✅ Yes: I do have intent to supply- but I need time. I’m keeping a list; reach out and I’ll keep you posted. https://t.co/f0h7Hdutp0
— Samuel March (@Sam_Oscar_March) February 27, 2021
Meanwhile, lawmakers and officials in other countries have similarly taken steps to normalize hemp.
Late last year, for example, Berlin’s public transit authority sought to take the stress out of holiday travel with promotional hemp-infused tickets that riders could eat.
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), meanwhile, is sponsoring a project to develop hemp fiber insulation that’s designed to be better for the environment and public health than conventional preparations are.
Last year, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced this week that it is awarding a Washington State-based company a $100,000 grant to support the development of sustainable bricks made from industrial hemp.
Photo courtesy of Twitter/Samuel March.
Culture
More Americans Say It Would Be Better If People Used Marijuana Instead Of Alcohol, Poll Shows
More Americans think it’d be good if people switched to marijuana and drank less alcohol than think the substance substitution would be bad, according to a new poll.
When asked in the YouGov survey, twenty-seven percent agreed that it’d be ideal if people used more cannabis instead of booze, whereas 20 percent said that would be a bad idea.
However, most respondents (38 percent) said it would be neither good nor bad, and an additional 15 percent said they weren’t sure.
While there’s been ample discussion about the pros and cons of alcohol versus cannabis, advocates have been quick to point out that liquor is strongly associated with long-term health issues and people can die from alcohol poisoning.
In contrast, there are no recorded deaths attributed solely to a marijuana overdose—by the federal government’s own admission—and the plant’s compounds have been shown to be medically beneficial for a number of health conditions.
The demographic breakdown of the poll, which involved interviews with 10,412 Americans on February 28, found that Democrats were more likely to say that making the switch to marijuana from alcohol would be good (34 percent), compared to Republicans (18 percent) and independents (27 percent).
Would it be good or bad if the average American drank less alcohol and used more marijuana?
Good – 27%
Bad – 20%
Neither – 38% https://t.co/WClXigomly pic.twitter.com/sxYGoj7OgQ— YouGov America (@YouGovAmerica) February 28, 2022
People aged 30-44 were the most likely to say cannabis substitution would be good (34 percent), whereas just 17 percent of those 65 and older said the same.
Regardless of public opinion, it does appear that states where cannabis is legalized for adult use are seeing a stronger trend toward marijuana sales over time.
For example, Massachusetts is officially collecting more tax revenue from marijuana than alcohol, state data released last month shows.
Illinois also saw cannabis taxes beat out booze for the first time last year, with the state collecting about $100 million more from adult-use marijuana than alcohol during 2021.
A 2019 report separately found that the number of drunk-driving accidents in Idaho decreased following the legalization of cannabis in neighboring Washington State.
Photo courtesy of Pixabay.
Culture
NCAA Moves To Lower Marijuana Penalties For Student Athletes And Increase THC Threshold In Drug Tests
Students athletes that are part of the NCAA would no longer automatically lose their eligibility to play following a positive marijuana test under rules that are being recommended by a key committee.
Additionally, the NCAA Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports (CSMAS) said that, effective immediately, the THC threshold that constitutes a positive test is being increased from 35 to 150 nanograms per milliliter, aligning the organization’s policy with that of the World Anti-Doping Agency.
Members have spent the last few months discussing potential changes to NCAA cannabis rules. And the decision to recommend greater leniency is consistent with conversations that have been ongoing in multiple professional sports leagues as more states move to enact legalization.
Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports adjusts THC test threshold https://t.co/x5Z04kTmDN
— Inside the NCAA (@InsidetheNCAA) February 25, 2022
“Reconsidering the NCAA approach to cannabis testing and management is consistent with feedback from membership on how to better support and educate student-athletes in a society with rapidly evolving public health and cultural views regarding cannabis use,” Brian Hainline NCAA’s chief medical officer, said in a press release.
“Marijuana is not considered a performance-enhancing substance, but it remains important for member schools to engage student-athletes regarding substance use prevention and provide management and support when appropriate,” he said.
While the committee’s eligibility recommendation is not binding, it urged each of the NCAA three divisions to adopt them into their respective bylaws.
For a first positive THC test, CSMAS said there should be no loss of eligibility as long as “the school provides a management plan and education for the student-athlete.”
The same goes for a second test, unless the athlete didn’t comply with the management plan, in which case the committee recommended a suspension from participation in 25 percent of regular season games. For a third violation, the recommendation is no loss of eligibility unless the athlete failed to comply with past management and education plans, and in that circumstance CSMAS says they should face a 50 percent regular season suspension.
By contrast, the current bylaws for Division I, II and III student athletes stipulate that a positive marijuana test immediately renders the player ineligible for 50 percent of the regular season. And for a second positive test, the athlete would be subject to the standard banned substances ineligibility bylaws, which means they would be suspended for an entire season.
“These adjustments to the NCAA drug testing program were approved after careful consideration and extensive discussion of the recommendations made by the Drug Testing Subcommittee, which has been meeting since last fall,” CSMAS Chair Stephanie Chu said. “The updated cannabis testing policies create a clear pathway for student-athletes to participate in education and management programs specific to their needs at the campus level.”
The conversation around drug testing and professional sports came to the fore last summer after U.S. sprinter Sha’Carri Richardson was suspended from the Olympics over a positive THC test. She admitted to using cannabis in a legal state after learning of her mother’s passing.
More recently, Richardson challenged the decision to allow a Russian skater to continue to participate in this month’s winter games despite the discovery that she’d tested positive for a banned performance enhancement drug.
The runner said last year that she’d feel “blessed and proud” if the attention her case raised would affect a policy change for other athletes. Even the White House and President Joe Biden himself weighed in on the case, with the president suggesting that there’s a question about whether the marijuana ban should “remain the rules.”
Meanwhile, the NFL’s drug testing policy already changed demonstrably in 2020 as part of a collective bargaining agreement.
NFL players no longer face the possibility of being suspended from games over positive tests for any drug—not just marijuana—under a collective bargaining agreement. Instead, they will face a fine. The threshold for what constitutes a positive THC test was also increased under the deal.
The NBA announced late last year that is extending its policy of not randomly drug testing players for marijuana through the 2021-2022 season. The association won’t be subjecting players to random drug testing for THC; however, they will continue to test “for cause” cases where players have histories of substance use.
In a similar vein, the MLB decided in 2019 to remove cannabis from the league’s list of banned substances. Baseball players can consume marijuana without risk of discipline, but officials clarified last year that they can’t work while under the influence and can’t enter into sponsorship contracts with cannabis businesses, at least for the time being.
Marijuana icon Snoop Dogg, who was featured at the Super Bowl halftime show on Sunday where an ad separate aired that indirectly supported legalization, argued that sports leagues need to stop testing players for marijuana and allow to them to use it as an alternative to prescription opioids.
