By Daniel A. Sumner | Robin S. Goldstein

• Under US federal law, weed, also known as “marijuana” or “cannabis,” remains a Schedule I illegal narcotic, in the same category as cocaine and heroin. Production and sale of weed are federal felonies punishable by severe prison terms.

• Individual US states, in conflict with federal law, began legalizing medical weed in 1996. However, in the past decade, the US Department of Justice has agreed not to enforce federal criminal weed laws against anyone who is following state laws.

• As of 2022, 33 percent of all Americans live in states with legal recreational sales of weed, 41 percent live in states with medical legalization but no legal recreational sale, and 26 percent live in states with total weed prohibitions.

• In its early years, legally produced and sold weed has struggled to capture market share. In most places where the sale and use of weed are now legal, illegal weed—unlicensed, unregulated, and untaxed—still has a dominant market share and shows no signs of fading away.

Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 2022. 7p.

By Daniel A. Sumner | Robin S. Goldstein

Key Points

• Cannabis containing more than 0.3 percent tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which the US government still calls “marijuana” but here we call “weed,” has been legalized by many state governments but is still illegal at the federal level.

• If a major goal of federal legalization is to help legal weed replace illegal weed, the best step forward for federal policy is simply to step out of the way. This would involve removing weed from the schedule of illegal narcotics, permitting states to implement cannabis policy as they see fit, and allowing cannabis to move among jurisdictions where it is legal.

• Forms of federal legalization that include more regulations and taxes on cannabis—including House and Senate bills that have been recently publicized—would almost surely do more harm than good, given the state and local policies already in place.

Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 2022. 5p.

By Howard Husock

• The legalization of cannabis, rather than sidelining the black market, has fueled it, providing cover to illicit cannabis enterprises that often undercut the legal market on price and accessibility.

• State policies, such as high or complex cannabis taxes, scant issuance of licenses for legal operation, and widespread local “opt-outs,” play a key role in keeping the legal market from outcompeting illegal alternatives.

• The treatment of alcohol and cigarettes may be better models: States should allow legal retail to proliferate to minimize the advantages illicit operators now enjoy.

• At the same time, as with tobacco, public health authorities should mount education campaigns to minimize marijuana use, in light of its demonstrated dangers.

Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 2024. 1113p.

By Jonathan P. Caulkins, Kristina Vaia Reimer

Background: Nations wrestle with whether to prohibit products that can harm consumers and third parties but whose prohibition creates illegal markets. For example, cannabis is banned in most of the world, but supply for non-medical use has been legalized in Uruguay, Canada, and much of the United States and possession restrictions have been liberalized in other countries. Likewise, supply and possession of fireworks have been subject to varying degrees of prohibition in multiple countries, with those bans prompting significant evasion. Methods: Current and past history of fireworks regulations, sales, and harms are reviewed and contrasted with those for cannabis. The focus is on the United States, but literature from other countries is incorporated when possible and appropriate. This extends the insightful literature comparing drugs to other vices (such as gambling and prostitution) by comparing a drug to a risky pleasure that is not seen as a vice but which has been subject to prohibition. Results: There are many parallels between fireworks and cannabis in legal approaches, harms to “users”, harms to others, and other externalities. In the U.S. the timing of prohibitions were similar, with prohibitions on fireworks being imposed a little later and repealed a little sooner. Internationally, the countries that are strictest with fireworks are not always those that are strictest with drugs. By some measures, harms are of roughly similar magnitude. During the last years of U.S. cannabis prohibition, there were about 10 emergency department (ED) events per million dollars spent on both fireworks and illegal cannabis, but fireworks generated very roughly three times as many ED events per hour of use/enjoyment. There are also differences, e.g., punishments were less harsh for violating fireworks prohibitions, fireworks consumption is heavily concentrated in just a few days or weeks per year, and illegal distribution is primarily of diverted legal products, not of illegally produced materials. Conclusions: The absence of hysteria over fireworks problems and policies suggests that societies can address complex tradeoffs involving risky pleasures without excessive acrimony or divisiveness when that product or activity is not construed as a vice. However, the conflicted and time-varying history of fireworks bans also show that difficulty balancing freedoms and pleasure with harms to users and others is not restricted to drugs or other vices. Use-related harms fell when fireworks were banned and rose when those bans were repealed, so fireworks prohibitions can be seen as “working” from a public health perspective, but not well enough for bans to be employed in all times or places

International Journal of Drug Policy. Volume 118, August 2023,

By The European Parliament

Cannabis is by far the most commonly used illicit drug (referred to as drug in this briefing) in the European Union (EU), where its distribution, cultivation, possession and use (consumption) are largely prohibited. The prohibition of drug-related activities other than those performed for medical or scientific purposes is the defining feature of the international drug control system. Set up by the United Nations (UN), this system is composed of three complementary conventions, to which all EU Member States are parties. Various countries around the world have made use of the flexibility of the UN system, not applying criminal penalties in some cases (e.g. for possession of small amounts of drugs for personal use) or replacing them with administrative ones. The UN bodies monitoring compliance with the conventions seem to have come to accept these policy choices. However, they remain resistant to the still rare yet increasingly common practice of legalising the recreational use of cannabis, which may entail regulating drug distribution and sale in a manner akin to that for alcohol and tobacco. In the EU, drug policy has remained primarily the Member States' preserve. The EU has fostered the Member States' cooperation on law enforcement and health-related issues, while at the same time respecting their diverse philosophies on how to address recreational drug use. National approaches range from very restrictive policies that prioritise criminal law responses, to more liberal ones that focus primarily on reducing the health and social harms resulting from drug use. In 2021, Malta became the first Member State to legalise recreational cannabis, and since then several others have taken steps that could potentially lead to similar drug policy reforms.

Brussels: European Union, 2023. 12p.