# Biden White House fires and otherwise ostricizes staffers for acknowledging they used marijuana in the past **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [March 21, 2021, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363 "2021-03-21T19:44:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![gdave](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gdave/32/3683_2.png) [@gdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gdave)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/21 "2021-03-22T00:27:35Z")
> [@Oly](#): > > So it is a Federal law that has not been and is all but certain not going to be enforced - hence, in effect, no Federal law at all. In 2020, there were [over 1,000 Federal convictions for marijuana trafficking,](https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/annual-reports-and-sourcebooks/2020/TableD1.pdf) and [marijuana was the primary drug in 7% of all Federal drug cases.](https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/annual-reports-and-sourcebooks/2020/FigureD1.pdf). Now it’s true, that’s _trafficking_, not simple possession, which it’s true the Federal government rarely prosecutes. The most recent statistics I could find for that are from 2017, when [there were only 92 convictions for simple marijuana possession.](https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/annual-reports-and-sourcebooks/2017/Table33.pdf) Note, however, that accounts for _43%_ of all Federal convictions for simple drug possession. The Federal government rarely prosecutes simple drug possession cases overall, but it’s _still illegal_. ---
**Author:** ![SCAdian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/scadian/32/3292_2.png) [@SCAdian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SCAdian)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/22 "2021-03-22T01:34:23Z")
People did something illegal and are being chastised for it? No way! ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/23 "2021-03-22T01:51:21Z")
Maybe he fired them before Kamala could put them in jail. Wait… Didn’t Kamala admit to smoking pot in the past? I wonder how the people fired for the same thing feel about that? And what did you expect from one of the authors of the 1994 crime bill? Joe Biden has been a drug warrior and authoritarian his whole life. And his VP is a prosecutor who delighted in throwing small time drug offenders in jail. She bragged about it, just as Joe bragged about his bill being so strict it nearly threw jaywalkers in jail. The mystery is why anyone expected something different. ---
**Author:** ![eschrodinger](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschrodinger/32/122_2.png) [@eschrodinger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschrodinger)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/24 "2021-03-22T01:52:20Z")
> [@Oly](#): > > When the first states legalized it (and I will forever be proud and grateful that I able to cast one of the votes that did so), the Feds under Obama took a hands off approach. Despite everything I despise about Trump, his admin continued in that way. And unless something really bizarre happens, Biden will too. So it is a Federal law that has not been and is all but certain not going to be enforced - hence, in effect, no Federal law at all. In actual Federal effect, it seems to survive only as a discriminatory employment practice. In the states where it is legal at the state level, it’s not being prosecuted, but it’s still illegal at the federal level everywhere. I very much want to see it legalized everywhere. I have a strong aversion for multiple reasons to breaking the law. It’s legal in my state, but I don’t use because it’s still illegal at the federal level. I am not surprised that other people don’t view it that way, but if you’re going to work in the White House, I think you should. I think far past use should not be a problem. Also, it’s not legal at the state level in plenty of states. It’s possible people who admitted recent use also admitted using in states where it’s illegal. Lots of people may think those laws are dumb (I do) but we want people in the White House who don’t think they get to pick and choose which laws to obey. ---
**Author:** ![Oly](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/oly/32/8255_2.png) [@Oly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oly)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/25 "2021-03-22T03:19:02Z")
> [@eschrodinger](#): > > Also, it’s not legal at the state level in plenty of states. It’s possible people who admitted recent use also admitted using in states where it’s illegal. As the Daily Beast article in the closed thread says, people whose use was exclusive to states where cannabis is legal were blackballed along with everyone else. For those who say use in the “far” past is OK but “recent” past is not, where’s the line, and why there and not somewhere else? If your stance is that you don’t want people who have broken Federal laws in the Whitehouse, isn’t breaking the Federal law X years ago (or whenever) just as wrong as breaking the law X years minus one day ago (or whenever)? Why not draw the line, say, at the day you were hired? Biden could have done that, and I wager few outside of the Tucker Carlson crowd would have fussed, and they are in a perpetual state of apoplexy anyway. Conversely, the majority would have either lauded it or said meh. And that’s the point: The continued proscription is pointless, opaque and arbitrary. In other words, BS. ---
**Author:** ![eschrodinger](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschrodinger/32/122_2.png) [@eschrodinger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschrodinger)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/26 "2021-03-22T03:49:56Z")
> [@Oly](#): > > As the Daily Beast article in the closed thread says, people whose use was exclusive to states where cannabis is legal were blackballed along with everyone else. > > For those who say use in the “far” past is OK but “recent” past is not, where’s the line, and why there and not somewhere else? I haven’t seen or read anything from a closed thread. As to the far past issue, I think if someone can show that they have a solid history of obeying the law and using good judgment going back for some time, then marijuana use, and other similarly petty offenses, in the past can be viewed as not a reflection on who that person is now. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/27 "2021-03-22T05:18:51Z")
> [@Oly](#): > > As the Daily Beast article in the closed thread says, people whose use was exclusive to states where cannabis is legal were blackballed along with everyone else. The problem is that cannabis is illegal in all the states, regardless of what that state has to say about it. ---
**Author:** ![Enjoy\_Slurm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/enjoy_slurm/32/3937_2.png) [@Enjoy\_Slurm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enjoy_Slurm)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/28 "2021-03-22T05:46:20Z")
No it isn’t. ---
**Author:** ![needscoffee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/needscoffee/32/1076_2.png) [@needscoffee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/needscoffee)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/29 "2021-03-22T05:50:17Z")
Article from [first locked thread](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/talk-about-neanderthal-thinking/938349) > **[Biden White House Sandbags Staffers, Sidelines Dozens for Pot Use](https://www.thedailybeast.com/biden-white-house-sandbags-staffers-sidelines-dozens-for-pot-use)** > > Several staffers were informally told by transition officials that some past marijuana use would be overlooked, only to be told later that they were being asked to resign. ---
**Author:** ![eschrodinger](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschrodinger/32/122_2.png) [@eschrodinger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschrodinger)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 7:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/30 "2021-03-22T07:09:26Z")
How do you figure? As an example, here’s some of what Colorado has to say about it: > [@](#): > > **Marijuana remains illegal under federal law, where it’s still classified as a controlled substance.** This difference between Colorado and federal laws can lead to challenges in knowing how and where the different laws apply. Consult with legal advisers to be sure you fully understand how federal and state laws may affect you. > > What this could mean to you > **Federal jobs: > Federal employees are not allowed to use marijuana. If you already have or hope to apply for a federal job, you may want to avoid marijuana use.** My bold. [https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/marijuana/federal-implications](https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/marijuana/federal-implications) ---
**Author:** ![Oly](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/oly/32/8255_2.png) [@Oly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oly)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 12:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/31 "2021-03-22T12:41:29Z")
> [@eschrodinger](#): > > …I think if someone can show that they have a solid history of obeying the law and using good judgment going back for some time… So “recent” disregard for the rule of law (insofar as marijuana use is concerned) is the basis for axing these staffers. But aren’t things like “solid history” and “some time” rather opaque and arbitrary, and aren’t opaqueness and arbitrariness the opposite of the rule of law? ---
**Author:** ![gdave](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gdave/32/3683_2.png) [@gdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gdave)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 1:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/32 "2021-03-22T13:15:04Z")
> [@Oly](#): > > So “recent” disregard for the rule of law (insofar as marijuana use is concerned) is the basis for axing these staffers. But aren’t things like “solid history” and “some time” rather opaque and arbitrary, and aren’t opaqueness and arbitrariness the opposite of the rule of law? I used to be involved in background investigations for security clearances. Just to be clear: I was not an investigator, nor was I involved in deciding to issue or deny clearances. I handled the initial applications, reviewed the final determinations, and had contact with the investigators. This was also about 15 years ago. With all of that being said: There were a _lot_ of kinds of derogatory information where there were no bright lines. If you had a shoplifting conviction 10 years ago and no other criminal record, you’d almost certainly be cleared. If you had two convictions in the last five years and were currently awaiting trial for a third arrest, you’d be denied. It’s always a judgement call. It’s not always “fair”, but that’s how judgement calls work. From what I understood of the process, there are a number of factors taken into account. Marijuana use was always treated more leniently than other Schedule I drugs (and this was 15 years ago, before decriminalization and legalization were widespread). Occasional or casual use were treated differently than habitual use (and yes, that distinction was also a bit squishy, but there were questions about frequency - once a week, two or three times a week, daily, etc.). Recency was a big thing - as I recall, one of the big bright lines was use within the last six months (I may well be misremembering, but I think there was actually an explicit and formal question on the SF86 about drug use in the last six months). Now, that was all for security clearance applications in the U.S. Army, which is not the same as the background investigation for a White House position. But it’s not entirely different. And this is all well-established procedure with decades of precedent. It’s not like the Biden White House decided on this policy out of the blue. Drug use, including prior drug use, has been grounds for denying and terminating White House employment for decades. It’s been a standard element of background investigations and background questionnaires throughout the Executive Branch for decades. What’s new is that most states have decriminalized or legalized marijuana use or authorized it for “medicinal” use (wink, wink, nudge, nudge), and there’s been a sea change in public perception of its use. A _lot_ of people (including many in this thread) don’t think twice about recreational marijuana use, so there are a now a lot of ambitious young would-be staffers who have openly used marijuana, and are running into trouble when they apply for sensitive positions in the Federal government. Because it’s still a Federal crime, and the policy on that hasn’t changed in decades, and can’t change until the Federal law is changed. ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 1:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/33 "2021-03-22T13:24:08Z")
Are you a lawyer? I’m not either, but your statement appears to be incorrect. ---
**Author:** ![gdave](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gdave/32/3683_2.png) [@gdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gdave)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/34 "2021-03-22T13:29:42Z")
@Smapti is absolutely correct. Marijuana use is not a violation of _state_ laws in all states, but it’s a violation of _Federal_ law in all states. Marijuana use is not legal anywhere in the United States. It’s a Schedule I drug. There are other activities, such as espionage, that aren’t violations of state laws, but I don’t think anyone would argue that someone that admitted to espionage could reasonably claim they shouldn’t be fired from the White House because there was no state law against it in the state where it occurred. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/35 "2021-03-22T13:50:15Z")
It is illegal in every state according to the Federal Government. Federal agents could go in and pile up a mountain of arrests in any state allowing marijuana use. They don’t, but they still make it a headache for marijuana enterprises to operate even when legal at the state level. Don’t the board rules limit discussions of marijuana because it is not legal in every state? Or because it is illegal in every state at the federal level? ---
**Author:** ![Si\_Amigo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/si_amigo/32/2877_2.png) [@Si\_Amigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Si_Amigo)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/36 "2021-03-22T13:54:59Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > Don’t the board rules limit discussions of marijuana because it is not legal in every state? Or because it is illegal in every state at the federal level? But marijuana is a political issue, this isn’t about how to obtain marijuana or how to use marijuana. The point that I and others are making is that this in an opportunity for President Biden to take a stance on marijuana usage and get off of the fence. Apparently he is sending a clear message about which side of the fence he is on and some people are not happy with it. If he is not sending a message that there is zero tolerance for marijuana usage in his administration then he should go into more detail about why these staffers were disqualified. I know he doesn’t have to, but if he wants to clear up the issue he should do so or face political backlash from his own supporters because he is creating internal strife in his own party and at time he should not be doing so. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/37 "2021-03-22T13:57:45Z")
I was pointing out to a mod (acting as a regular Doper) that not only is it illegal in every state, the board rules are affected because of that. Of course it’s a stupid law. Every state and federal marijuana law should be removed. Other drugs can be discussed but at this point it is absurd to maintain this stupid attitude about marijuana. This attitude about weed is the only thing to point out about Biden where he is just too old and totally doesn’t get it. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/38 "2021-03-22T14:41:52Z")
> [@needscoffee](#): > > The article I read, that was linked to on the now-closed thread, was clear that only a few people were let go (due to more than just past pot use - including the particular job position). From the OP’s article: > [@](#): > > Five people are no longer employed at the White House, while additional staffers are working remotely. In many of the cases involving staffers who are no longer employed, additional security factors were in play, including for some hard drug use, the official said. It’s not at all clear that anyone was fired just for “acknowledging they used marijuana in the past.” I, for one, don’t feel like I have enough information to decide whether the White House’s actions were justified or not. ---
**Author:** ![SingleMalt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/singlemalt/32/3961_2.png) [@SingleMalt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SingleMalt)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/39 "2021-03-22T15:08:56Z")
Just a bit of anecdotal information. My sister-in-law, a former regular user of cannabis, was in-line for a Federal job that required a security clearance, and at that point, she stopped using. Some 3 - 4 months later, after admitting to being a regular user on her security paperwork, she was called in for a security interview. She admitted again to being a former user. The reaction from the interviewer was along the lines of, “Being honest about the use was a good thing, stopping was a good thing, and because you were honest, it won’t be a problem for your clearance. However, you will need to test clean today, and we will periodically check to be sure you stay clean. You ok with that?” She has the job, but has had to be tested roughly monthly. Perhaps some of these sidelined workers failed one of these criteria? Details are quite lacking. ---
**Author:** ![asterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4da419/32.png) [@asterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asterion)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2021, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363/40 "2021-03-22T17:11:45Z")
Besides the specifics of marijuana, I personally think part of the issue is that a lot of the “security risks” are based on “what could be used as pressure”. I think that US drug policy is such that they set themselves up for this to be an issue. After all, if the stigma isn’t there, or the threat of prison isn’t there, there’s no pressure. Of course, I also generally don’t want to hear about the “threat” of an individual person somewhere when the last four years under Trump was a massive national security nightmare. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-white-house-fires-and-otherwise-ostricizes-staffers-for-acknowledging-they-used-marijuana-in-the-past/938363.md?page=3)