Cory Gardner plans to use budget bill to stop Sessions from going after legal weed

Nick Coltrain
The Coloradoan
U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner talks with Rob Graves about milk production at Morning Fresh Dairy during a tour in Bellvue on Friday, January 5, 2018.

Colorado's Congressional delegation plans to use federal appropriations bills to stop U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions from going after marijuana operations made legal at the state level, Sen. Cory Gardner said Friday.

Gardner said he organized a conference call with fellow Colorado congress members Friday and came away with an agreement that adding a rider to an appropriations bill was the proper first step. Now, it's a matter of building support across state lines — and with 29 states having some form of legal cannabis, he thinks a majority vote would be there.

"We've got to build this coalition over the next several weeks, and really this coalition is already naturally formed with the states that have made this a issue a priority in importance," Gardner, a Republican, said. "I don't know that we'll have the support or buy-in of Speaker Paul Ryan or (Senate Majority) Leader Mitch McConnell, but I know there's a tremendous amount of bipartisan support that would be more than the majority of the House and the Senate"

Gardner, who was in the Fort Collins area touring local businesses Friday, said he felt misled by Sessions on federal marijuana policy and that Sessions' decision Thursday to rescind the so-called Cole memo took him by surprise.

The Cole memo was an Obama-era guidance from the Department of Justice not to go after marijuana businesses that were complying with state law. Gardner said Sessions assured him before his confirmation as attorney general that going after marijuana businesses made legal in their respective states wouldn't be a priority.

"I felt like I was misled," Gardner said of his conversation with Sessions. "I think the Department of Justice underestimated the importance of the issue and quite frankly I wouldn't be surprised if the attorney general and the President are in different places on this."

President Donald Trump, before he was elected, told 9News in Denver that he believed marijuana rights should be left to the states.

Story continues below the gallery.

Gardner had a phone call with Sessions shortly after he rescinded the marijuana guidelines but did not reach a conclusion with him. He hopes to have a meeting next week. His takeaway was that Sessions didn't feel he went back on his word.

"He believes he is not changing anything. That is what the attorney general said," Gardner said.

Gardner did not support marijuana legalization in Colorado but said he respects the decision by voters to legalize it for medical and recreational use. He thinks the move by Sessions will "spur a lot of conversations," including those about removing marijuana from the highest category of dangerous drugs in the Controlled Substances Act, and a bill he co-sponsored with most of Colorado's delegation to allow marijuana businesses to take standard tax deductions available to other businesses. Those and other marijuana bills are stalled in Senate and House committees, often without hearings.

However, "first and foremost will be the discussion on the appropriations rider to address what just happened," Gardner said.

Meanwhile, U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colorado, sent Sessions a letter asking him to rescind the new guidance on marijuana enforcement and reinstate the Cole memo. States with legal marijuana are obligated to continue to follow the will of their voters, regardless of the Department of Justice's actions, he wrote.

The Obama-era guidance helped states with legal marijuana, including Colorado, create regulations that minimized the need for federal intervention, Bennet wrote. On top of the new rules giving way to "nebulous federal interaction," he also warned it would be another roadblock between legal marijuana businesses and banks. 

"This may raise significant public safety issues and make it harder to ensure businesses are complying with state laws and regulations — which is the exact opposite intended effect of the 2018 guidance," Bennet wrote.