Will my work experience in the marijuana industry hurt or help? 171/3.36 Forum

[criminaltheory]

Since everyone else here seems to be basing their opinions on nothing substantial, so I'll do the same but say go for it and go hard. Check in ahead of time with the schools and the state bars, but I think they'll be way less obnoxious about it than folks seem to think. Be upfront with and confident about your past like you've been in this thread and you'll sound like a forward thinking entrepreneur/risk taker. The bars are worried about moral character, and with no convictions I think you have a strong argument for passing C&F requirements in spite of not obeying a law. I'm not saying it'll be a breeze, and you might have to actually make the argument to a committee. But I wouldn't freak out; just do what has to be done.

I bet all these other posters freaking out about federal law never brought back a cigar from Europe and don't roll through stop signs.

Wow, impressive, every one of your posts is more mind-boggling than the last. I've never said this before, but just stop posting. And you appear to be a fellow South Carolinian, that's embarrassing. How are states refusing to let him sit for the bar obnoxious? This debate isn't even about marijuana use. I'm all for legalization. But the bar is the certification a lawyer needs to practice law. Lawyers help make and enforce the law. Attorneys enjoy special privileges in our legal system that regular citizens do not, and with those privileges comes the responsibility to uphold and follow the law. There isn't a more serious C&F violation than being a Federal FELON! The law schools and state bars are faced with a person who has been committing a felony for years and now wants a JD to help him commit the same felony on a bigger scale. The OP might be a very nice guy, but in my opinion, he should not be allowed to become an attorney, and I think most schools will think the same way.

Well bless your heart, you're going to go to law school! I hope you bring both your charm and wit along with you up north, you're going to make a great prosecutor.

OP asked how it'll deal with his T-14 (and by extension, C&F Bar) chances, not whether you think the OP should or should not be allowed to become an attorney. You may be shocked to learn even felony convictions don't disqualify a candidate from every state bar, and that lying about an alcohol violation you got in your dorm could be worse than being a Federal FELON!

[HRomanus]

Since everyone else here seems to be basing their opinions on nothing substantial, so I'll do the same but say go for it and go hard. Check in ahead of time with the schools and the state bars, but I think they'll be way less obnoxious about it than folks seem to think. Be upfront with and confident about your past like you've been in this thread and you'll sound like a forward thinking entrepreneur/risk taker. The bars are worried about moral character, and with no convictions I think you have a strong argument for passing C&F requirements in spite of not obeying a law. I'm not saying it'll be a breeze, and you might have to actually make the argument to a committee. But I wouldn't freak out; just do what has to be done.

I bet all these other posters freaking out about federal law never brought back a cigar from Europe and don't roll through stop signs.

Wow, impressive, every one of your posts is more mind-boggling than the last. I've never said this before, but just stop posting. And you appear to be a fellow South Carolinian, that's embarrassing. How are states refusing to let him sit for the bar obnoxious? This debate isn't even about marijuana use. I'm all for legalization. But the bar is the certification a lawyer needs to practice law. Lawyers help make and enforce the law. Attorneys enjoy special privileges in our legal system that regular citizens do not, and with those privileges comes the responsibility to uphold and follow the law. There isn't a more serious C&F violation than being a Federal FELON! The law schools and state bars are faced with a person who has been committing a felony for years and now wants a JD to help him commit the same felony on a bigger scale. The OP might be a very nice guy, but in my opinion, he should not be allowed to become an attorney, and I think most schools will think the same way.

Well bless your heart, you're going to go to law school! I hope you bring both your charm and wit along with you up north, you're going to make a great prosecutor.

OP asked how it'll deal with his T-14 (and by extension, C&F Bar) chances, not whether you think the OP should or should not be allowed to become an attorney. You may be shocked to learn even felony convictions don't disqualify a candidate from every state bar, and that lying about an alcohol violation you got in your dorm could be worse than being a Federal FELON!

"South Carolina is too small for a republic and too large for an insane asylum." - James Petigru

There's a huge difference between being having a federal felony on your record - for which you can be contrite and which might have been a one-time occurence - and openly embracing your federally illegal profession. OP wasn't caught smoking a blunt, he makes a living consciously flaunting federal laws.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Of course, a number of states have blessed flouting those particular federal laws. He's not out diddling children.

[Tanicius]

Of course, a number of states have blessed flouting those particular federal laws. He's not out diddling children.

Yeah, the thing is, he was licensed through the state. I don't see how that could possibly disqualify him in that particular state at least. Employers may lawfully hold it against him, but I don't think the state's bar association can.

Also, I thought the federal executive branch has determined, through their delegated powers by Congress, that state dispensaries that follow proper medical procedures created by their states and do not inject the drugs into interstate commerce, are in fact lawful.

[MistakenGenius]

Post removed.

[jdmonkey]

Morally I don't think it would be any worse than stating that you started a large brewery. Marijuana is much less dangerous than alcohol and it is legal in your state. It would be like admitting to being a practicing homosexual in Texas in 2002, it was illegal in the abstract, but most people didn't give a crap.

[HRomanus]

Morally I don't think it would be any worse than stating that you started a large brewery. Marijuana is much less dangerous than alcohol and it is legal in your state. It would be like admitting to being a practicing homosexual in Texas in 2002, it was illegal in the abstract, but most people didn't give a crap.

Obviously the moral question is outside the scope for this discussion, but the legal facts remain. Possessing, manufacturing, and distributing marijuana is a federal crime.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Morally I don't think it would be any worse than stating that you started a large brewery. Marijuana is much less dangerous than alcohol and it is legal in your state. It would be like admitting to being a practicing homosexual in Texas in 2002, it was illegal in the abstract, but most people didn't give a crap.

Obviously the moral question is outside the scope for this discussion, but the legal facts remain. Possessing, manufacturing, and distributing marijuana is a federal crime.

Sure. And the state licensed him to commit it, and the state admits you to the bar. I get the argument that he won't get admitted, and it may be what happens, but I don't think it's quite as simple as "federal crime."

[Tanicius]

Morally I don't think it would be any worse than stating that you started a large brewery. Marijuana is much less dangerous than alcohol and it is legal in your state. It would be like admitting to being a practicing homosexual in Texas in 2002, it was illegal in the abstract, but most people didn't give a crap.

Obviously the moral question is outside the scope for this discussion, but the legal facts remain. Possessing, manufacturing, and distributing marijuana is a federal crime.

I'm not sure that's the end of it. Don't you have to be causing it to end up in the stream of commerce? I know about Gonzalez v. Raich and the aggregate effect and all that, but I believe the federal government, after being given its delegable powers, has determined that proper and state licensed medical marijuana facilities do not violate that provision.

[rutgers17]

This is actually a really fascinating thread. I may be crazy, but I think you could potentially turn it into a positive (if it's not an outright rejection to the bar, which you can easily find out by calling now). You've gone through state channels and followed all the rules -- it doesn't seem as black and white to me as many people in this thread seem to think. I think if you call any states you're interested in and find that the bar says you won't fail the C&F (admittedly I have no idea if this will be the case), it could make for a pretty interesting addition to your application. You're an entrepreneur in a highly coveted job on the cutting edge of a field that's about to break wide open with legalization coming in more states and potentially federally soon. It's definitely worth it to call and ask the bar (and probably schools for that matter), but I would be surprised if they just threw your application out on the grounds of breaking federal law when you own a state sanctioned and regulated business.

[HRomanus]

Obviously the moral question is outside the scope for this discussion, but the legal facts remain. Possessing, manufacturing, and distributing marijuana is a federal crime.

I'm not sure that's the end of it. Don't you have to be causing it to end up in the stream of commerce? I know about Gonzalez v. Raich and the aggregate effect and all that, but I believe the federal government, after being given its delegable powers, has determined that proper and state licensed medical marijuana facilities do not violate that provision.

I've never been interested in the marijana policy debate, so I don't know the full scope of the facts, but a quick Google search indicates that the Obama administration maintains that marijuana is a federal crime but encourages federal prosecutors to not act on it in states that allow it. I didn't see any official federal policy that condones marijuana use or state policies.

I don't know how it would affect Washington bar admission or a Washington school admission, but I don't think this is a positive work experience for a lawyer in the vast majority of the country. The fact remains: it is a violation of federal law and is still strongly opposed in certain sections of the country. Moreover, this is on another degree from marijuana use; manufacture and distrbution are on another level of social stigma.

[Tanicius]

Obviously the moral question is outside the scope for this discussion, but the legal facts remain. Possessing, manufacturing, and distributing marijuana is a federal crime.

I'm not sure that's the end of it. Don't you have to be causing it to end up in the stream of commerce? I know about Gonzalez v. Raich and the aggregate effect and all that, but I believe the federal government, after being given its delegable powers, has determined that proper and state licensed medical marijuana facilities do not violate that provision.

I've never been interested in the marijana policy debate, so I don't know the full scope of the facts, but a quick Google search indicates that the Obama administration maintains that marijuana is a federal crime but encourages federal prosecutors to not act on it in states that allow it. I didn't see any official federal policy that condones marijuana use or state policies.

I don't know how it would affect Washington bar admission or a Washington school admission, but I don't think this is a positive work experience for a lawyer in the vast majority of the country. The fact remains: it is a violation of federal law and is still strongly opposed in certain sections of the country. Moreover, this is on another degree from marijuana use; manufacture and distrbution are on another level of social stigma.

Well, the bar admission problem is a different problem from employment, which, if you pass the bar, would not be nearly as difficult to obtain due to this "work experience." Criminal defense attorneys, and probably also a lot of personal injury firms, wouldn't bat an eye at this stuff. In fact, it'd probably be a sort of plus.

[HRomanus]

I've never been interested in the marijana policy debate, so I don't know the full scope of the facts, but a quick Google search indicates that the Obama administration maintains that marijuana is a federal crime but encourages federal prosecutors to not act on it in states that allow it. I didn't see any official federal policy that condones marijuana use or state policies.

I don't know how it would affect Washington bar admission or a Washington school admission, but I don't think this is a positive work experience for a lawyer in the vast majority of the country. The fact remains: it is a violation of federal law and is still strongly opposed in certain sections of the country. Moreover, this is on another degree from marijuana use; manufacture and distrbution are on another level of social stigma.

Well, the bar admission problem is a different problem from employment, which, if you pass the bar, would not be nearly as difficult to obtain due to this "work experience." Criminal defense attorneys, and probably also a lot of personal injury firms, wouldn't bat an eye at this stuff. In fact, it'd probably be a sort of plus.

My comments were made exclusively in relation to question of LS and bar admission.

[sirstynkalot]

Wow I just checked back and this thread has grown quite a bit.

Quick update - A couple schools so far said they wouldn't count it against me, and I checked with the WA bar and they said as long as I was operating in full compliance with all relevant local and state laws AND LEGALLY ACQUIRED THE KNOWLEDGE TO OPERATE THE BUSINESS they didn't see any ethical concern. I'll be able to go there. the T14 still may not be so hot on it. I've started asking around.

And as far as violating federal laws goes, the notice to prosecutors HRomanus referred to included a reiteration of "federal priorities in drug enforcement." Basically it said not to pester state growers/retailers as long as x, y, z (no guns, no sale to minors, no interstate commerce, etc). It's nonbinding, of course, but it's the federal government officially looking the other way as long as we use common sense and follow all other relevant laws. Same stance they take on medical marijuana. It's a very interesting position.

I guess this gives a good enough sense of the attitudes around the country. Largely dismissed as a criminal enterprise with a few people considering it a risky but legitimate opportunity. I appreciate everyone weighing in, both positive and negative. I wanted to know honestly what kind of attitudes I was likely to face in this process.

And, of course, sorry fellas but I'm not terribly interested in debating the legitimacy of my actions. You all are welcome to all you like, but I feel like I'm paying enough taxes and working under enough scrutiny that if someone has a complaint it's up to the state to answer it. They're making a lot more off my crops than I am and they'll send SWAT to protect me if I need it.

And, let's face it. If I'm caught putting one toe out of line in this business, law school is going to be the least of my worries. We're going to have about 4,000 plants. Our security regulations were designed by the gaming industry. If I'm cheating I'll be caught and if I'm caught I'm royally screwed... as was intended. You don't put your name on a state registry as a commercial pot grower without expecting to live the rest of your life under a microscope.

[Ti Malice]

Very good news! I'm pleasantly surprised. Please keep updating the thread as you acquire more info from other schools. I doubt we'll have too many people in your position on TLS in the future who could take advantage of the info, but it would be interesting to see different schools' reactions all the same.

I guess this gives a good enough sense of the attitudes around the country. Largely dismissed as a criminal enterprise with a few people considering it a risky but legitimate opportunity. I appreciate everyone weighing in, both positive and negative. I wanted to know honestly what kind of attitudes I was likely to face in this process.

I'm not sure that's accurate. My skeptical take doesn't reflect anything about my own views on the legitimacy of your business. I was just trying to guess what the C&F examiners might say, given the idiotic state of the law, and how that might impact your admissions chances. I certainly hope my guesses are wrong.

[rpupkin]

Wow I just checked back and this thread has grown quite a bit.

Quick update - A couple schools so far said they wouldn't count it against me, and I checked with the WA bar and they said as long as I was operating in full compliance with all relevant local and state laws AND LEGALLY ACQUIRED THE KNOWLEDGE TO OPERATE THE BUSINESS they didn't see any ethical concern. I'll be able to go there. the T14 still may not be so hot on it. I've started asking around.

Definitely check with Boalt and SLS. Although you would normally be out at both schools with a 3.36, your unique experience gives you a shot. Despite the majority view ITT, I suspect that your experience will be a not insignificant plus for many schools in the T14. I am not kidding.

[sundance95]

.

[sirstynkalot]

I figured for funsies I'd add an update as requested.

I checked with the various state bars and they (EDIT: mostly) said that as long as the business was operating legally they had no problem with me operating the business. I also checked in with a few schools and got the same response. It's a still bit early to celebrate so if I do get rejected everywhere I'll be sure to let y'all know. And I recognize the skepticism wasn't personal by any stretch. You'd be hard-pressed to find a soul left in this state at least who thought marijuana prohibition was working as intended.

I didn't go hard on the work experience for my personal statement. I went with my volunteer experience. It's closer to what I want to do and I'm pretty sure my resume covers my work experience well enough for them to get the idea. Paperwork, poisons, and management. All of life's little pleasures. It would be almost as boring for them to read as it was for me to write.

For future reference for any other growers turned lawyers, make sure you have a squeaky record and memorize every relevant law and code. There are a ton of loopholes and ambiguities that could screw a law career without you realizing it and I know I haven't found them all yet. For instance, I-502 was worded to hold employers administratively accountable for employees' crimes that have no relation to the business. I can be penalized by the Liquor Board and banned from practicing law if one of my employees steals a car. I sure wish I'd have known that bit before I signed up.

[gatesome]

the more liberal schools would probably eat it up, if you spin it the right way

[AOT]

.