Public Lawyers and Marijuana Regulation

Although 23 states and the District of Columbia have now legalized marijuana for medical purposes, marijuana remains a prohibited substance under federal law. Because the production, sale, possession and use of marijuana remain illegal, there is a risk of prosecution under federal laws. Furthermore, those who help marijuana users and providers put themselves at risk — federal law punishes not only those who violate drug laws but also those who assist or conspire with them to do so. In the case of lawyers representing marijuana users and businesspeople, this means not only the real (though remote) risk of criminal prosecution but also the more immediate risk of professional discipline. Elsewhere, we wrote about the difficult place in which lawyers find themselves when representing marijuana clients. We argued that while both the criminal law and the rules of professional conduct rightly require legal obedience from lawyers, other countervailing factors must be considered when evaluating lawyers’ representation of marijuana clients. In particular, we asserted that considerations of equity and access to justice weigh dispositively in favor of protecting lawyers who endeavor to help their clients comply with state marijuana laws, and we suggested means of interpreting relevant criminal law provisions and rules of professional conduct to achieve this result. This article builds on that analysis, taking on the particular issue of the public lawyer’s’ role in marijuana regulation. For government lawyers, the key issues in exercising discretion in the context of marijuana are not clients’ access to the law and equality but rather determining the clients’ wishes and serving them diligently and ethically. Lawyers representing state agencies, legislatures and the executive branch of government draft and interpret the rules and regulations regarding marijuana. Lawyers for federal, state and local governments then interpret those rules to determine the obligations and responsibilities of those they represent and to help their clients meet those obligations and carry out their required tasks. Both state and federal prosecutors are charged with determining what conduct remains illegal under the new rules and, perhaps more importantly, with exercising discretion regarding whom to prosecute and to what extent. Marijuana regulation is not a niche area of government regulation; it will influence the practice of virtually every public lawyer in the years to come. Public lawyers must understand the changes in marijuana law and the implications for government clients. Given the pervasiveness of the modern regulatory state, the situation is no easier — and, in many ways, it is more complicated — for public lawyers than it is for private ones. Public lawyers face myriad practice challenges with respect to marijuana law reform, and while we do not purport to identify and resolve all of the issues that are sure to arise in this short paper, we hope that the article helps alert public lawyers to some of the risks involved in participating in marijuana regulation so that they can think carefully about their obligations when these issues arise.

Contributions of ergonomics to the construction of bus drivers health and excellence in public transport and at work

This article is the product of research that analyzed the work of bus drivers of a public transportation company that is considered a benchmark reference in its field of operations, in which it strives to achieve operating excellence. Within this context, the authors sought to understand how such a company has managed to maintain a policy that is capable of reconciling quality public transport while also providing working conditions compatible with the professional development, comfort and health of its workers. Ergonomic work analysis and activity analysis were the guiding elements used in this study. Initial analyses indicate that the activity of drivers includes serving a population and providing mobility for it, which depends on driving the vehicle itself and on relationships with colleagues, users, pedestrians, drivers and others.

Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus: the science and the law. A resource guide for judges, prosecutors and law enforcement.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

Aboriginal Art Collection: Highlights from Australia's Public Museums and Galleries

Contents: Introduction SUSAN COCHRANE National Gallery of Australia, Canberra WALLY CARUANA National Museum of Australia, Canberra DAVID KAUS Museum and Art Gallery of the Northern Territory, Darwin MARGIE WEST Art Gallery of New South Wales, Sydney HETTI PERKINS AND KEN WATSON Museum of Contemporary Art, Sydney BERNICE MURPHY Queensland Art Gallery, Brisbane MARCO NEALE Queensland Museum, Brisbane RICHARD ROBINS National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne JUDITH RYAN Museum Victoria, Melbourne GAYE SCULTHORPE Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery, Hobart KIM AKERMAN AND DAVID HANSEN Art Gallery of Western Australia, Perth MICHAEL O'FERRALL AND BRENDA L. CROFT Western Australian Museum, Perth ROSS CHADWICK AND MANCE LOFGREN Art Gallery of South Australia, Adelaide JANE HYLTON South Australian Museum, Adelaide PHILIP A. CLARKE List of Plates Bibliography Editor's Acknowledgments Contributors Index

Public sociology and social engagement - Considerations on Brazil

The debate on public sociology is spreading in Brazil, a country potentially responsive to Burawoy`s proposals for two reasons: as one of the most unequal countries on the planet, Brazil offers much historical material for reflexive and socially engaged sociology to bring to the non-academic public; and Brazil has a critical and militant sociology that strongly interacts with public sociology. This article provides a `different` reading, through the lens of public sociology of the intellectual and political course of two representatives of this critical and militant sociology: Florestan Fernandes and Francisco de Oliveira.

Escitalopram prolonged fear induced by simulated public speaking and released hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis activation

Simulated public speaking (SPS) test is sensitive to drugs that interfere with serotonin-mediated neurotransmission and is supposed to recruit neural systems involved in panic disorder. The study was aimed at evaluating the effects of escitalopram, the most selective serotonin-selective reuptake inhibitor available, in SPS. Healthy males received, in a double-blind, randomized design, placebo (n = 12), 10 (n = 17) or 20 (n = 14) mg of escitalopram 2 hours before the test. Behavioural, autonomic and neuroendocrine measures were assessed. Both doses of escitalopram did not produce any effect before or during the speech but prolonged the fear induced by SPS. The test itself did not significantly change cortisol and prolactin levels but under the higher dose of escitalopram, cortisol and prolactin increased immediately after SPS. This fear-enhancing effect of escitalopram agrees with previously reported results with less selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and the receptor antagonist ritanserin, indicating that serotonin inhibits the fear of speaking in public.

Public policy and the prevention of substance-use disorders

Drug prevention has traditionally focused on influencing individual attitudes and behaviours. In particular, efforts have been directed towards adolescents in the school setting. However, evaluations of school-based drug education have identified limited success. There is increasing recognition that drug abuse is one of a number of risk behaviours, including truancy, delinquency and mental health problems, which share common antecedents that begin in the early years of childhood. Furthermore, these behaviours are shaped by macroenvironmental influences including the economic, social, cultural, and physical environment. Drug prevention needs to adopt a broader perspective: with greater collaboration in related programmes such as crime prevention and suicide prevention; with greater attention to the macroenvironmental influences on problem behaviours; and with greater attention to healthy development in the first years of childhood. (C) 2002 Lippincott Williams Wilkins.

Public investment and the risk premium for equity

Analysis of the equity premium puzzle has focused on private-sector capital markets. However, the existence of an anomalous equity premium raises important issues in the evaluation of public-sector investment projects. These issues are explored below. We begin by formalizing the argument that an equity premium may arise from uninsurable systematic risk in labour income, and show that, other things being equal, increases in public ownership of equity will improve welfare, up to the point where the equity premium is eliminated. Finally, we consider policy implications and the optimal extent of public ownership.