New Illinois Law Expands Medical Pot Program Despite Federal Prohibition

By Michael Maharrey

Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker has signed two bills into law that expand the state’s medical-weed program despite federal prohibition.

A coalition of six Democrats sponsored Senate Bill 455 (SB455). The laws amends a 2018 law known as “Ashley’s Law” authorizing schools to allow guardians or other caregivers to administer cannabis-infused products students authorized to use medical weed. SB455 expands the law by requiring schools to allow school nurses or administrators to administer medical weed. Students will also be able to self-administer cannabis under the supervision of a school nurse. Additionally, the new law expands student access to medical weed to include before and after-school activities.

The new law will go into effect Jan. 1, 2020.

Senate Bill 2023 (SB2023) was originally a weed banking bill that would have prohibited state banks from denying certain services to weed businesses. During the legislative process, that language was scrapped and the bill was amended to expand and make permanent the state’s medical-weed pilot program. The program was slated to sunset next year.

SB2023 adds 11 new conditions eligible for treatment with medicinal cannabis. The new law also allows qualifying veterans to access medical weed as part of an Opioid Alternative Pilot Program. Under the new law, advance practice registered nurses and physician assistants will now be able to recommend medical weed. Under the pilot program, only physicians could certify patients.

The laws overwhelmingly passed both houses of the Illinois assembly and went into immediate effect with Gov. Pritzker’s signature on Aug. 9.

Organically Grown CBD Oil and Products Available (Ad)

Earlier this year, Pritzker signed a bill into law legalizing weed for adult personal use as well. The legalization of weed in Illinois and the expansion of the state’s medical-weed program have moved forward despite federal weed prohibition.


Under the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA) passed in 1970, the federal government maintains complete prohibition of weed. Of course, the federal government lacks any constitutional authority to ban or regulate cannabis within the borders of a state, despite the opinion of the politically connected lawyers on the Supreme Court. If you doubt this, ask yourself why it took a constitutional amendment to institute federal alcohol prohibition.

The expansion of Illinois’ medical cannabis program and the legalization of weed for recreational use remove a significant layer of laws prohibiting the possession and use of weed in the state, but federal prohibition remains in effect. This is significant because FBI statistics show that law enforcement makes approximately 99 of 100 weed arrests under state, not federal law. When states stop enforcing weed laws, they sweep away most of the basis for 99 percent of weed arrests.

Furthermore, figures indicate it would take 40 percent of the DEA’s yearly-budget just to investigate and raid all of the dispensaries in Los Angeles – a single city in a single state. That doesn’t include the cost of prosecution. The lesson? The feds lack the resources to enforce weed prohibition without state assistance.


Enactment of SB455 and SB2023 further ignore federal prohibition and continue the process of nullifying it in practice in Illinois.

Colorado, Washington state, Oregon and Alaska were the first states to legalize recreational cannabis, and California, Nevada, Maine and Massachusetts joined them after ballot initiatives in favor of legalization passed in November 2016. Michigan followed suit when voters legalized cannabis for general use in 2018. Vermont became the first state to legalize weed through a legislative act in 2018.

With 33 states including Delaware allowing cannabis for medical use, the feds find themselves in a position where they simply can’t enforce prohibition anymore.

“The lesson here is pretty straightforward. When enough people say, ‘No!’ to the federal government, and enough states pass laws backing those people up, there’s not much the feds can do to shove their so-called laws, regulations or mandates down our throats,” Tenth Amendment Center founder and executive director Michael Boldin said.

Passage of these two bills demonstrates another important strategic reality. Once a legalizes weed – even if only in a very limited way – it tends to eventually expand. As the state tears down some barriers, markets develop and demand expands. That creates pressure to further relax state law. These new laws represent a further erosion of unconstitutional federal weed prohibition.

Michael Maharrey [send him email] is the Communications Director for the Tenth Amendment Center, where this article first appeared. He proudly resides in the original home of the Principles of ’98 – Kentucky.See his blog archive here and his article archive here.He is the author of the book, Our Last Hope: Rediscovering the Lost Path to Liberty. You can visit his personal website at and like him on Facebook HERE

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.

Visit the USSA News store!
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Activist Post

This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact the administrator by using the contact form located in the top-left menu. Your request will be immediately honored. Please visit for more terrific, conservative content. The owner of this website may be paid to recommend American Bullion. The content of this website, including the positive review of American Bullion, the negative review of its competitors, and any other information may not be independent or neutral.