#controlled substances

i feel kind of surprised no one's done a bit where wei wuxian in his yllz era is buying pills off a drug dealer, right, and lan wangji is all >:CCC "immoral! unsafe! illegal! what about all your potential."

but the thing is. it's just ritalin.

it is, in fact, the exact ritalin prescription wei wuxian already had, from his doctor.

I have a "missed Rx" bottle. Any time I forget to take my meds (and realize it), I put the pills I should have taken into this bottle. I treat these like they don't exist, which is why I don't leave them in the original bottle (yay for adhd object impermanence). This helps prompt me to get my refills on time.

THIS IS NOW MY EMERGENCY STOCKPILE of medication - particularly for my Adderrall.

If I don't/can't get my refill in time, if there's a shortage, if there's some kind of weather event or other emergency that prevents me from accessing a refill, etc, I have this. For controlled substances prescriptions, there's no other way to have a backup that I know of.

I occasionally swap the "forgotten" pills out 1:1 with new pills so they don't expire - I try to do it when I pick up my new prescription.

----------------

The rest of this became my personal manifesto regarding access to ADHD stimulant medications. Sorry, not sorry.

You can take this poll even if you’re not American!

If you take multiple, vote based on the drug that’s the most restricted (schedule number is closer to 1)

Link with more info and list. You can also look up “[medication name] drug schedule” or “is [medication name] a controlled substance”.

Karen Thompson for Abortion, Every Day:

Earlier this year Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry signed into law SB 276, a first-of-its-kind legislation classifying mifepristone and misoprostol as controlled dangerous substances. The drugs, commonly used to perform medication abortions, are responsible for 63% of abortions in the US. As a result of this new law, mere possession of mifepristone and misoprostol without a prescription in Louisiana can result in fines of up to $5,000 or “imprisonment of no more than five years with or without hard labor.”  We know what happens now: The outcome of this new layer of criminalization is entirely foreseeable. By putting the pills on a drug registry with special access rules, providers are no longer able to easily prescribe the pills and the ability of OB/GYNs to nimbly provide needed—and even emergency—health care if a woman is miscarrying is chilled. In Louisiana’s telling, mife and miso are the new heroin and medication abortion care puts pregnant people’s lives in jeopardy, not their own dangerous law. The lack of situational awareness around the law would be comical if the inevitable devastation of its effects wasn’t so horrifying. 

This is true even for people who are not using the drugs to end their pregnancies, but for the myriad other health issues the drugs treat—from softening the cervix for an endometrial biopsy to the insertion of IUDs. But the massive burden SB 276 places on pregnant people—particularly those seeking to self-manage their own abortions—is disastrous. By reclassifying a safe, effective, regulated drug used for a broad range of healthcare purposes into a dangerous controlled substance whose distribution and use can be entered and tracked in a state database, Louisiana, as one local health care provider noted, would “effectively be creating a database of every woman who is prescribed mifepristone and misoprostol, regardless of the reason, truly monitoring women and their pregnancies. That should be unimaginable in America.”

Such policing is not only very much imaginable in America, but has been the country’s sad truth for decades. Before the overturning of Roe v. Wade, state surveillance and criminalization of women during pregnancy and around their pregnancy outcomes—based on their alleged drug use, in particular—was the daily truth for countless women and other people who can become pregnant. A past truth is simply devolving into a dystopian present.  To be clear, classifying drugs in light of their potential harms is not a new thing. One of the most infamous classification tools, the Controlled Substances Act, has been in place since the 1970s, when President Nixon signed it into law. The CSA became the enforcing mechanism for Nixon’s “War on Drugs,” and gave both the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Food and Drug Administration power to determine which substances were fit for medical use. Such regulation can serve a useful purpose; the CSA is itself the legislative grandchild of the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906, which required food and drug manufacturers to clearly label any product that contained dangerous substances, including morphine and opium, drugs often included in everyday products from soft drinks to teething medicines. 

But SB 276 is not trying to protect babies. As John Erhlichman, one of Richard Nixon’s Watergate co-conspirators, bluntly stated in 1994: “[w]e knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the [Vietnam] war or blacks, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could . . . vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”  Once again, government actors are lying about drugs to criminalize women’s access to and control over their own social and bodily autonomy. Louisiana’s law unmasks in broad daylight what so many people and communities living with the consequences of bad drug policy have long known: the “war on drugs” is a political invention to construct fiscal and social power over individuals and communities, not to provide much needed public health services. 

[...] By criminalizing possession of abortion medication, the Venn diagram of overlap between the “war on drugs” and the war on reproductive freedom has, once again, become a perfect circle. The efforts to control reproduction and drugs are rooted in the same forms of bigotry: controlling women’s behavior and liberties rather than providing actionable solutions to satisfy public health needs. 

A few days ago, I started writing a very long, very detailed post about marijuana legality state by state... and it got eaten by tumblr's drafts features.

This post is going to be the Cliff Notes version of that post.

First off, Wikipedia's Legality of cannabis by U.S. jurisdiction page is an excellent resource for this. It doesn't capture everything, but it captures a lot, and you can always go to linked pages for individual states and/or check the linked sources for more information.

The short(ish) version:

Under federal law, specifically the Controlled Substances Act, marijuana is a Schedule I drug and cannot be prescribed or possessed legally aside from a very tightly-controlled quota for scientific research purposes. This scheduling includes language stating that marijuana "has no currently accepted medical use" and "[t]here is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision", which is... arguable.

There is a process for changing drugs, including marijuana, to a less restrictive schedule under the Controlled Substances Act or removing them as a controlled substance altogether. But that process hasn't happened for marijuana so far.

Technically, this supersedes state and local law on the subject; state law can be more restrictive than federal law, but not less restrictive, or else the whole idea of federal law governing the whole country is moot. Theoretically, that means that federal police could arrest anyone, anywhere, for marijuana possession under the Controlled Substances Act, regardless of what local authorities say on the matter.

Realistically, that's highly unlikely. Any case where someone gets arrested for marijuana in a state that says it's okay is practically asking for a Supreme Court case on the matter, and said Supreme Court ruling would inevitable be controversial and divisive, and right now everybody's content to just... pretend the federal law doesn't exist when the state says otherwise. Probably some years down the line such a Supreme Court case will indeed happen and cause a shift to the current murky and unstable status quo, but it's highly unlikely that said Supreme Court case will star you, random marijuana user. (And if it does, well, upside is there's bound to be a bunch of folks willing to represent you for free just to get in on the action!)

Also, the federal police are busy, and hey, if they don't have to worry about marijuana use in a large chunk of the country, that just gives them more time to go after other kinds of federal criminals.

So, if state law's what matters, what do the states say?

Again, I point you to the Wikipedia page outlining exactly this. (It's most of what I'm using for a resource here myself.)

Recreational use of marijuana is legal in 24 states (Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington state), three U.S. territories (Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, and U.S. Virgin Islands), and Washington D.C. Note that Ohio's measure here is newly passed and doesn't actually take effect until December 7, 2023, three days from now.

Commercial distribution is legal everywhere that recreational use is legal except Virginia and Washington D.C.

Personal cultivation for recreational use is legal everywhere that recreational use is legal except Delaware, Illinois, New Jersey, and Washington state.

Recreational use is decriminalized in Hawaii, Louisiana, New Hampshire, and North Dakota.

Medicinal use of marijuana is legal in 38 states (the recreational use ones, plus Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Utah, and West Virginia), four U.S. territories (the recreational use ones plus Puerto Rico), and Washington D.C.

Medicinal use is decriminalized in Nebraska and North Carolina.

Iowa gets a special shout-out here for allowing medicinal marijuana, but not allowing any actual distributors of said medicinal marijuana in the state; medicinal marijuana patients need to go out-of-state to get their marijuana supplies, but those supplies remain legal upon bringing them back to Iowa.

Personal cultivation for medicinal use is legal everywhere that recreational cultivation is legal plus Illinois, Washington state, Hawaii, Oklahoma, and South Dakota.

Marijuana remains illegal for both medicinal and recreational use in ten states: Georgia (though several cities/counties in Georgia have decriminalized it), Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Wisconsin, and Wyoming, and also the territory of American Samoa. Everywhere but American Samoa has some exception for CBD oil, though, with limits on the percentage of THC present.

A number of Native American reservations have also legalized marijuana use, either recreational or medicinal.

Most of these laws have restrictions beyond just "it's legal". You might have to be 18 to purchase marijuana, or 19, or 21; there's generally a maximum amount you're allowed to possess, or grow, at one time; medicinal use might be restricted to specific symptoms or conditions outlined in the original law; details may vary about having it in a public place, or about the specific forms allowed.

Also, some laws specifically address potential effects of marijuana use within the state beyond simple criminality. Can marijuana use be considered in a child welfare case, and held against you as a parent? Can use of medicinal marijuana get you fired if you fail a drug test your employer gave you, or just because your employer doesn't like it? Does being fired for using marijuana count as being fired "for cause" for unemployment purposes? Can marijuana use disqualify you from accessing needed health care like organ transplants? Excellent questions! The answers will vary. Or they might not be specified in the original statute at all, which leaves it open for the courts to decide.