California’s marijuana law has long been a thorny issue, as politicians have sought to make it easier for businesses to sell pot and for the state’s growers to sell their product.
The state’s Department of Food and Agriculture has argued that the law is a major threat to the state economy and has sued to block changes that would limit access to marijuana.
But as the debate over the law has intensified, the state has also been grappling with how it should enforce it.
Some critics, including the U.S. Supreme Court, say the law unfairly targets medical marijuana patients.
Meanwhile, others, including some lawmakers, say it is a reasonable approach that will help control the state.
The California Department of Public Health and Environment says it has more than $4 billion in state funds available to help with the enforcement of the law.
It is trying to figure out how to keep up with a rapidly changing industry.
A federal judge struck down the law in January, ruling that it violates federal law.
Since then, there have been a series of court decisions, including a federal district court decision that the state is not allowed to enforce its law without a federal warrant.
The Department of Justice says that could change.
But federal courts are divided over whether a state can be held liable for laws it makes that do not violate federal law, and whether that can be a legitimate reason to keep laws from being enforced.
“I am still trying to understand the impact of the court’s decision, how it could have a positive effect on enforcement of our state’s marijuana laws,” said U.C. Davis professor Peter Hotez, a drug policy expert.
“If you go back and you go into the past, the courts have struck down marijuana prohibitions, but in the past they have struck them down with very broad exceptions.
The U.s. “
So I’m trying to do a little bit of reading and see what the future holds, but at the moment, I think it’s not going to be a good thing.”
Supreme, in a 2010 decision, struck down federal marijuana laws that targeted medical marijuana.
And last month, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a case about California’s new medical marijuana law.
The justices were split 5-4, with Justice Anthony Kennedy dissenting.
“The decision to legalize marijuana has a substantial impact on the health of Californians, on the economic health of the state and the health and safety of our nation,” Kennedy said.
He said he thought the court could uphold the state marijuana law even though it is constitutional under federal law because it is not an attempt to “unilaterally disarm the states or to take away their power to govern.”
The court could also uphold the law if it is seen as a reasonable effort to curb illegal drug use.
California is not alone in its legal challenges to the marijuana law, with several states moving to overturn it.
Last month, Washington state, which has the most populous state in the country, moved to repeal its medical marijuana laws.
The Justice Department filed a petition to have Washington, D.C., strike down the laws.
In Arizona, a bill that would have allowed people with cancer to legally use marijuana for medical purposes was defeated last year in the state Senate, when it was narrowly defeated.
But some medical marijuana advocates are hoping that the U