In Proclamation 10467 of October 6, 2022 (Granting Pardon for the Offense of Simple Possession of Marijuana), I exercised my authority under the Constitution to pardon individuals who committed or were convicted of the offense of simple possession of marijuana in violation of the Controlled Substances Act and section 48–904.01(d)(1) of the Code of the District of Columbia (D.C. Code). As I have said before, convictions for simple possession of marijuana have imposed needless barriers to employment, housing, and educational opportunities. Through this proclamation, consistent with the grant of Proclamation 10467, I am pardoning additional individuals who may continue to experience the unnecessary collateral consequences of a conviction for simple possession of marijuana, attempted simple possession of marijuana, or use of marijuana. Therefore, acting pursuant to the grant of authority in Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution of the United States, I, Joseph R. Biden Jr., do hereby grant a full, complete, and unconditional pardon to all current United States citizens and lawful permanent residents who, on or before the date of this proclamation, committed or were convicted of the offense of simple possession of marijuana, attempted simple possession of marijuana, or use of marijuana, regardless of whether they have been charged with or prosecuted for these offenses on or before the date of this proclamation, in violation of:

(1) section 844 of title 21, United States Code, section 846 of title 21, United States Code, and previous provisions in the United States Code that prohibited simple possession of marijuana or attempted simple possession of marijuana;

(2) section 48-904.01(d)(1) of the D.C. Code and previous provisions in the D.C. Code that prohibited simple possession of marijuana;

(3) section 48-904.09 of the D.C. Code and previous provisions in the D.C. Code that prohibited attempted simple possession of marijuana; and

(4) provisions in the Code of Federal Regulations, including as enforced under the United States Code, that prohibit only the simple possession or use of marijuana on Federal properties or installations, or in other locales, as currently or previously codified, including but not limited to 25 C.F.R. 11.452(a); 32 C.F.R. 1903.12(b)(2); 36 C.F.R. 2.35(b)(2); 36 C.F.R. 1002.35(b)(2); 36 C.F.R. 1280.16(a)(1); 36 C.F.R. 702.6(b); 41 C.F.R. 102-74.400(a); 43 C.F.R. 8365.1-4(b)(2); and 50 C.F.R. 27.82(b)(2).

My intent by this proclamation is to pardon only the offenses of simple possession of marijuana, attempted simple possession of marijuana, or use of marijuana in violation of the Federal and D.C. laws set forth in paragraphs (1) through (3) of this proclamation, as well as the provisions in the Code of Federal Regulations consistent with paragraph (4) of this proclamation, and not any other offenses involving other controlled substances or activity beyond simple possession of marijuana, attempted simple possession of marijuana, or use of marijuana, such as possession of marijuana with intent to distribute or driving offenses committed while under the influence of marijuana. This pardon does not apply to individuals who were non-citizens not lawfully present in the United States at the time of their offense.

Pursuant to the procedures in Proclamation 10467, the Attorney General, acting through the Pardon Attorney, shall review all properly submitted applications for certificates of pardon and shall issue such certificates of pardon to eligible applicants in due course.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-second day of December, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty-three, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-eighth.

JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR.

  • @StarManta
    link
    English
    901 year ago

    Title is wrong: NOT future. Only “on or before the date of this proclamation.” (I don’t think it’s possible to pardon people in the future)

    • @fpslemOP
      link
      English
      171 year ago

      Good point, I revised it to say “including those not yet prosecuted.” (Titles suck at giving context, I almost have some sympathy for title editors of newspapers.)

    • Neato
      link
      fedilink
      101 year ago

      You can’t pardon future offenses. Would be a great way to setup crimes otherwise.

    • Leeks
      link
      fedilink
      7
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      While I don’t know if this is legal, I think the poster is pointing towards the following line for the future part

      regardless of whether they have been charged with or prosecuted for these offenses on or before the date of this proclamation

      Looking at this site, the poster is misinterpreted the line

      • @fpslemOP
        link
        English
        121 year ago

        Yep. I just fixed it. As I read it, future offenses are not covered, but future prosecutions of offenses having already occurred are covered.

      • Nougat
        link
        fedilink
        61 year ago

        Which, of course, is related to the criminal justice process against acts committed on or before this date. If you’re caught smoking a joint tomorrow, you don’t qualify for this blanket pardon.

        However, the fact that this blanket pardon exists suggests that a “refresh” of this blanket pardon would likely exist in the future, extending the cutoff date further. That should have the effect of making simple possession or use charges at the federal level far less common, i.e., they would be used only to gain leverage on someone suspected of a greater crime, and not as the major charge. (I’m not saying that’s “right,” just saying that’s the reality.)

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          However, the fact that this blanket pardon exists suggests that a “refresh” of this blanket pardon would likely exist in the future, extending the cutoff date further.

          In fact, this is the refresh of the 2022 pardon and he’s making a point to note that. This is as close as you can get to a yearly pardon without running into gnarly constitutional issues. It’s a new magic Christmas tradition.

          • Nougat
            link
            fedilink
            31 year ago

            Why didn’t I notice that? Thank you for pointing it out, and have a happy Don’t Break Anything Day.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              21 year ago

              have a happy Don’t Break Anything Day

              Thank you! You too!

              Now I’ll just upgrade the schema of the production database and head out the door!

    • @Tylerdurdon
      link
      English
      41 year ago

      I’m pardoning you for that thing you’re gonna do in a few weeks. You’ll know.

  • @FireTower
    link
    English
    301 year ago

    on or before the date of this proclamation, committed or were convicted of the offense of simple possession of marijuana

    Not a pardon of future offenses.

    • @fpslemOP
      link
      English
      81 year ago

      Thanks, fixed it.

  • @Stovetop
    link
    English
    211 year ago

    *on federal lands

  • @someguy3
    link
    English
    171 year ago

    Is this for federal charges only? (Ie Not state charges.)

    • @fpslemOP
      link
      English
      211 year ago

      Yes, only gubernatorial pardons can apply to state offenses. :-/

  • @jpreston2005
    link
    English
    141 year ago

    now do it nationwide! just legalize it on the federal level already for christs sake

    • Franklin
      link
      English
      15
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Unfortunately that can only be done without a senate resolution. Please remember to write your congressman.

      In the meantime Biden has appealed to the DEA to review rescheduling the drug to a lower classification. Along with these pardons he has done everything in his power.

  • Nougat
    link
    fedilink
    12
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Uh, where’s the “future” part?

    Edit: OP corrected the title! Yay!

      • Nougat
        link
        fedilink
        31 year ago

        Biden pardons all offenses of simple possession/use of marijuana (even those not yet prosecuted)

  • kpw
    link
    fedilink
    121 year ago

    Honestly it is a pretty dumb move to eliminate tax payers by throwing them in jail for marijuana anyways.

  • @Clbull
    link
    English
    101 year ago

    Oh shit.

    Kinda semi-relevant, but does this mean FPSRussia can finally possess firearms again?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    41 year ago

    From 2022. How many people got federal charges for just possession?

    This is just a pardon, not decriminalization. And only at the federal level.

    As much as I’d like it to be something, this is barely an acknowledgement to the legal issues around marijuana.

    • @xkforce
      link
      English
      191 year ago

      Biden isnt a dictator. He cant just magic the drug war away. What he can do is pardon people and thats what hes doing.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        01 year ago

        I get that he’s doing what he is limited to. My concern is the optics of this are being overblown. Pot will never instantly or universally become legal.

        • @BeMoreCareful
          link
          English
          21 year ago

          No, but this isn’t nothing and it’s in the right direction.

          It’s bully from the bully pulpit, I guess.

    • @spongebue
      link
      English
      141 year ago

      I don’t know why this is showing up over a year later, but the president cannot pardon state charges.

      • @riquisimo
        link
        English
        141 year ago

        Double check the proclamation, he updated the effective date to today.

    • BraveSirZaphod
      link
      fedilink
      41 year ago

      Re-scheduling of marijuana is currently ongoing, but this is the government and things are slow.

      • w2tpmf
        link
        fedilink
        51 year ago

        It took a single pen stroke to get marijuana added to the schedule 1 list…and that wasn’t even from the President, it was his (Nixon’s) AG.

        There was no legal process, no legislation, no oversight, no anything. Just an order to the DEA to arbitrarily add it to the list because Big Dick wanted to wage war on the hippies.

        • @spamfajitas
          link
          English
          31 year ago

          This is tangential, but I feel like the nickname Big Dick would be better used when referring to LBJ, no? Wasn’t he the one known for constantly bragging about how big his hog was?

          Usually Nixon gets called Tricky Dick.

          • @qarbone
            link
            English
            21 year ago

            Yeah, Nixon was Tricky Dicky.

          • @krakenx
            link
            English
            11 year ago

            Nixon’s Dickery was so big it’s still fucking the country.

    • @bhmnscmm
      link
      English
      01 year ago

      deleted by creator

  • @xantoxis
    link
    English
    31 year ago

    *all federal offenses. He has no jurisdiction to pardon anything else. Headline, as usual, is overzealous.

    • @Tylerdurdon
      link
      English
      -21 year ago

      Feels like pandering to me.

      “The youth vote just isn’t into a geriatric. What can we do to get them to vote?”

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          31 year ago

          Exactly. I’m going to vote for someone and I expect them to keep doing things I agree with to maintain my vote.

          I don’t care if they’re faking it or honestly give a damn, but that their agenda seemingly aligns with things I believe in or support - f it, have my vote.

    • @Earthwormjim91
      link
      English
      201 year ago

      Not sure how you think that’s possible when the supreme court already struck down the blanket $10,000 forgiveness.

      • FlashMobOfOne
        link
        English
        -61 year ago

        Easy.

        He’s done it unilaterally several times for small populations of people.

        He doesn’t need SCOTUS. SCOTUS’ role here is just to run cover so he can present the appearance of acting on his promise without taking money out of the assholes who fund his campaign.

        • Franklin
          link
          English
          10
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Every time he’s done it in the past there has been existing law and precedent which allowed him to do it, what you’re asking has no precedence.

          To do something of that magnitude there would need to be a senate resolution.

        • BraveSirZaphod
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          It’d be nice if you just opened up with acknowledging that you’ve already divorced yourself from reality and embraced conspiracy so people can save their time.

          • the post of tom joad
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -11 year ago

            Implying that anyone who disagrees with you must be divorced from reality is not the rhetorical dunk you apparently think it is.

            Engage with the points or downvote and move on.

            Choice 3 is quietly acknowledging to yourself that you aren’t yet the bastion of intellect and objectivity you hope to become

            • @CoggyMcFee
              link
              English
              41 year ago

              The person they were replying to was absolutely spouting a conspiracy theory that is divorced from reality tho

              • the post of tom joad
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -11 year ago

                You’re right, the guy he’s responding to didn’t do a fantastic job either. Sentence 1 has truth to it, sentence 2 is pure speculation. However…

                I went hard on op because they are in the habit of doing something that happens to be a personal pet peeve of mine.

                It’s called “i hate when people i think are intelligent get too comfortable having already proved it to themselves.”

                Op has said nothing that causes me to think he knows what he is talking about here. in fact im confident that in this case they probably don’t know that Biden could do an end-around the courts.

                Related to my pet peeve is my anger at the purpose his unearned smugness serves. Instead of discussing how or why something might be accomplished with what we have today, all these insufferable nose-lookers seem to be experts on is how things cannot. All their energy is devoted to shutting down any thought that isn’t repeating the official line of the Democratic party.

                While i believe the official line of the Ds is probably somewhat closer to reality than the official line of the Rs, there’s not a chance in hell they’re 100% honest, c’mon! Come on! How am i supposed to take these dumbasses seriously when they sound more like a parrot than a person?

                So i let em know, and maybe you didn’t actually ask, but there you go

      • FlashMobOfOne
        link
        English
        -31 year ago

        He doesn’t need SCOTUS.

        He can cancel student debt unilaterally and has already done so several times, but only for small populations of people.

    • muse
      link
      fedilink
      51 year ago

      President Biden pardons everyone for having student debt.

      You’re forgiven for owing money