Colorado understands the Plaintiff States’ frustration that national marijuana policy now hinges on a series of executive memoranda articulating a policy of “prosecutorial discretion.” See, e.g., Cole Memo at 3. But, again, although the Plaintiff States are willing to challenge the Administration’s non- enforcement of federal law, see Texas v. United States, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18551, they have not done so here.
This demonstrates the need for the federal government’s involvement in this case. The Complaint and Brief in Support raise questions of federal enforcement policy that are “distinctively federal interests, best presented by the United States itself.”
As I noted, the true party in interest in this case is the United States, for its failure to enforce the controlled substance laws. In today’s orders, the Court has called for the views of the United States.
Now, finally, we will get the Obama Administration on record explaining its failures to faithfully execute the laws. And yes, that will be cited in the inevitable Texas v. United States merit briefing.