Civil Division

Federal changes would assist states with legal cannabis markets to protect public safety and support legal cannabis businesses
 
OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today joined a multistate coalition of 12 attorneys general in sending a letter expressing support for the federal government’s efforts to evaluate and reschedule cannabis to allow for federal recognition of its medical and research value. The letter requests that the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) reclassify cannabis from a Schedule I controlled substance, which is reserved for substances with no accepted medical use and those considered highly addictive, to a Schedule III controlled substance, which recognizes its legitimate medical use and lower potential for abuse. This change would allow cannabis businesses in the 38 states with legal cannabis programs, including California, to take certain federal tax exemptions, and would allow for broader testing on the safety and efficacy of medical cannabis.
 
“Dozens of states have now either legalized cannabis or allowed for its medical use. It is high time the federal government reschedule this controlled substance to allow for medical use, open avenues for research opportunities, and provide legitimate businesses with recognition by the IRS,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Currently the federal government’s classification considers cannabis as equally dangerous and addictive as heroin or ecstasy; this is simply not the reality. There is ample evidence and data to support that cannabis has legitimate medical uses, and its current classification creates barriers for states that have legalized its use and regulated sale. I commend the Biden Administration for their efforts to request this evaluation and urge the DEA to approve this change to allow legitimate cannabis businesses to thrive and states to better protect the legal market.”
 
In the letter, the attorneys general urge the federal government to make this important change as its impacts will assist the states in administering their own legal programs by:

• Lowering the tax burden for legitimate cannabis and cannabis-related businesses by authorizing them to take IRS deductions.
• Providing cannabis users with fewer barriers to obtain public housing, immigrant and nonimmigrant visas, and legally possess firearms.
• Supporting states with legal cannabis markets to better help businesses and protect public safety by disincentivizing the illicit cannabis market.   

A copy of the letter can be found here.  

Secures administrative stay of dangerous district court decision in assault weapons ban challenge 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta issued the following statement in response to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ order granting an administrative stay of a district court decision invalidating the state’s assault weapons ban. As a result of the Ninth Circuit’s order, California’s ban on assault weapons remains in effect until further notice. The Ninth Circuit also expedited the appeal in this case and placed it on calendar for oral argument in December 2023.  

“Weapons of war do not belong on our streets. We were once again reminded of this fact as we witnessed a mass shooter gun down dozens of people in Maine, killing 18 victims,” said Attorney General Bonta. “We must protect our communities from these dangerous weapons. We know that these restrictions work to prevent mass casualty events and save lives. It is no accident that California’s gun death rate is 43% lower than the rest of the nation — it is because of our lifesaving gun safety laws, such as the assault weapons ban. Today’s decision means that it remains unlawful to purchase, transfer, or possess assault weapons in California as we continue to defend the law on appeal and seek reversal of the dangerous and misguided district court decision that, if upheld, would put our communities at grave risk.” 

The Ninth Circuit granted an administrative stay on the district court decision, after Attorney General Bonta argued that the district court’s application of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bruen is deeply flawed and ignores relevant historical laws. The Ninth Circuit decision stays a district court decision enjoining California’s decades-old assault weapons ban, the Assault Weapons Control Act. The Assault Weapons Control Act was initially passed in 1989 following two mass shootings, including one at a California school. The legislature strengthened those provisions in 2000. For the last three decades, California has restricted the manufacture, distribution, transportation, importation, sale, lending, and possession of firearms that qualify as “assault weapons” under California law. Those weapons have specific tactical enhancements or configurations that make the weapons more dangerous to the public and law enforcement and more susceptible to criminal misuse. Data reflect that assault weapons in general are used disproportionately in crime relative to their market presence, that they are used often to commit mass shootings, and that they inflict more numerous and more extensive injuries than other weapons. Assault weapons have been used in numerous horrific mass shootings throughout the country, including the mass shootings in Orlando in 2016, Sutherland Springs in 2017, Parkland in 2018, and Uvalde in 2022.

Attorney General Bonta stands with partners throughout the state to continue tackling the issue of gun violence strategically and aggressively by:

• Defending California's common sense gun safety laws, including by obtaining a stay of an order enjoining California's restrictions on large-capacity magazines.
• Educating the public on gun violence prevention through the Office of Gun Violence Prevention, including through the first-ever data report issued by the office to provide a robust review of gun violence data in California and throughout the U.S. and to help guide policy and strategy discussions related to reducing gun violence.
• Advocating for gun laws including by sponsoring Assembly Bill 1594 to increase accountability for the firearm industry, working to strengthen federal laws to protect the public from ghost guns, and successfully defending California’s laws to prevent gun violence.
• Seizing guns from prohibited persons in the Armed and Prohibited Persons System, and through multiagency sweeps in the Bay Area and Los Angeles County, conducting operations targeting individuals attempting to illegally purchase guns, and collaborating with local law enforcement partners.
• Ending the sale of illegal firearms through litigation against ghost gun retailers, and by putting a stop to the sale of illegal assault weapons in Orange County 

A copy of the decision can be found here.

Large-capacity magazine bans prevent mass shootings, are consistent with Second Amendment

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today joined a coalition of 18 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in support of the District of Columbia’s restrictions on large-capacity magazines (LCMs). Washington, D.C.’s law bans the possession, sale, or transfer of LCMs holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition. California law also imposes similar restrictions on LCMs.

“Large capacity magazines have been used in many horrific mass shootings around the country, including right here in California,” said Attorney General Bonta. “I applaud the district court for declining to block Washington, D.C.’s commonsense gun law prohibiting large capacity magazines, and urge the Court of Appeals to reject the effort to invalidate the district’s life-saving legislation.”

In California, it has been illegal to manufacture, import, keep or offer for sale, give, or lend LCMs with more than 10 rounds of ammunition since 2000. It has been illegal to purchase and receive LCMs since 2013. Proposition 63, which was passed by Californians in 2016, added a ban on the possession of LCMs. The law was challenged and initially struck down by a district court. But that case is currently being heard by the Ninth Circuit, which granted California’s request for a stay of the district court decision. The ban remains in effect until further notice.

Firearms equipped with LCMs are estimated to account for up to 36% of crime guns nationwide. In mass shootings where four or more were people killed from
2015 to 2022, 60% involved firearms with LCMs and accounted for a third of all mass shooting deaths and more than 80% of all injuries. LCMs have been used in numerous mass shootings throughout the country, including the mass shootings in Orlando in 2016, Sutherland Springs in 2017, Parkland in 2018, and Uvalde in 2022.  While a 2019 study by Columbia University found that, “deaths in high-fatality mass shootings, relative to the population, were more than three times higher in states that did not restrict LCMs,” states such as California remain impacted by the lack of a broader federal ban on LCMs.

The challenge to the district’s law, Hanson v. District of Columbia, was filed by a group of plaintiffs which also sought to preliminarily block the law while the district court considers its constitutionality. The district court denied the motion for a preliminary injunction. 

In the brief filed in the D.C. Circuit, which can be found here, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition argue that district court decision must be upheld because:

• Plaintiffs failed to show that the possession of LCMs is protected by the Second Amendment.
• LCMs are not commonly used for self-defense purposes and pose a unique danger to the public.
• The district’s law is consistent with historical restrictions on dangerous weapons and accessories not commonly used for self-defense to protect public safety.
• The district is not alone in restricting LCMs. Currently, 14 states, as well as the district, limit magazine capacity.

Attorney General Bonta stands with partners throughout the state to continue tackling the issue of gun violence strategically and aggressively by:

• Educating the public on gun violence prevention through the Office of Gun Violence Prevention, including through the first-ever data report issued by the office to provide a robust review of gun violence data in California and throughout the U.S. and to help guide policy and strategy discussions related to reducing gun violence.
• Advocating for commonsense gun laws including by sponsoring Assembly Bill 1594 to increase accountability for the firearm industry, working to strengthen federal laws to protect the public from ghost guns, and successfully defending California’s laws to prevent gun violence.
• Seizing guns from prohibited persons in the Armed and Prohibited Persons System, and through multiagency sweeps in the Bay Area and Los Angeles County, conducting operations targeting individuals attempting to illegally purchase guns, and collaborating with local law enforcement partners.
• Ending the sale of illegal firearms through litigation against ghost gun retailers, and by putting a stop to the sale of illegal assault weapons in Orange County.

California’s ban on assault weapons remains in effect

SACRAMENTO — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today filed a notice of appeal to overturn a district court decision in Miller v. Bonta invalidating California’s decades-old assault weapons ban, the Assault Weapons Control Act. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California found elements of the Assault Weapons Control Act unconstitutional but granted the Attorney General’s request for a stay of the decision to allow the Attorney General to appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. At this time, the assault weapons restrictions, including those applicable to firearms defined as assault weapons under California Penal Code section 30515, remain in effect. Attorney General Bonta will appeal the decision to the Ninth Circuit and will seek a further stay pending appeal to ensure that these vital public safety protections remain in place to prevent gun-related deaths and injuries in California communities. 

“Weapons of war have no place on California’s streets,” said Attorney General Bonta. “This has been state law in California for decades, and we will continue to fight for our authority to keep our citizens safe from firearms that cause mass casualties. In the meantime, assault weapons remain unlawful for purchase, transfer, or possession in California. The Supreme Court was clear that Bruen did not create a regulatory straitjacket for states. Once again, this district court issued a dangerous and misguided decision and I will work vigorously to reverse it on appeal. We will not stop in our efforts to protect the safety of communities to live without fear of becoming victims of gun violence, while at the same time respecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners.”

The district court’s decision involves a challenge to California's Assault Weapons Control Act. In June 2020, following a bench trial, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California held that portions of the law violated the Second Amendment. The Attorney General filed a notice of appeal and successfully petitioned the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to stay that judgment, allowing California to continue to enforce the law while the case was pending. After New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen was decided in June 2022, the Ninth Circuit granted the Attorney General's motion to remand the case back to the federal district court. The Attorney General will now appeal the district court’s latest decision to the Ninth Circuit. 

In addition to today’s decision in Miller v. Bonta, the same district court also recently issued a decision invalidating California’s large-capacity magazine ban. Attorney General Bonta has appealed that decision and secured a court order by an en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals which stayed the decision and allowed the ban to remain in effect pending appeal. Large-capacity magazines are firearm magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The en banc court’s order concluded that the state is likely to succeed on the merits in defending the large-capacity restrictions and that maintaining the restrictions pending appeal is in the best interest of the public safety of Californians. 

Gun violence remains a growing threat to public safety throughout the nation. Mass shootings are on the rise throughout the country and frequently feature assault weapons equipped with large-capacity magazines, causing more deaths and injuries. On average, there are over 130 gun deaths each day and  over 48,000 each year in the U.S. Guns are the leading cause of death among children and adolescents aged 1-17, with U.S. children being more likely to die from gun violence than in any other comparable country. In 2022, California was ranked as the #1 state for gun safety by Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, and the state saw a 43% lower gun death rate than the national average. According to CDC data, California’s gun death rate was the 7th lowest in the nation and the gun death rate for children under 18 is  less than half (60% below) the average for the rest of the nation.

The notice of appeal can be found here.  

Joins brief to the Ninth Circuit in support of Hawaii’s gun restrictions

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today joined 18 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in support of Hawaii’s and other states’ authority to restrict the carrying of firearms in designated locations, including private property without consent and other sensitive places such as parks and banks. The brief was filed in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Wolford v. Lopez after a district court decision issued a preliminary injunction halting enforcement of Hawaii’s law. In the brief, the attorneys general urge the Ninth Circuit to reverse the district court’s decision striking down the prohibition on carrying firearms in sensitive places such as bars, beaches, banks, and parks, as well as private property without the property owner’s consent. The brief argues that the law is in line with a long tradition of constitutionally acceptable regulations designed to meet states’ responsibility to protect their residents from gun violence and intimidation.

“It is not only constitutional, but commonsense to respect the right of property owners to say if firearms can be brought onto their private property; the court should not take away their legal right to do so,” said Attorney General Bonta. “States have the responsibility for protecting their communities. Our citizens should not have to live in fear of gun violence. The fact is, more guns in more places makes us less safe and interferes with the ability of our citizens to exercise their constitutional rights. Under Bruen, the Supreme Court acknowledged that states have a right to enact reasonable restrictions to protect communities. We support and recognize states’ authority to enact laws to maintain public safety, including constitutional gun regulations that respond to local needs and concerns.”

The attorneys general argue in the brief that the challenged provisions are consistent with a tradition of constitutionally acceptable regulations designed to meet states’ need to protect their residents and the public safety of communities. These regulations are common and a method of ensuring adequate protection and safety for locations that have become increasingly vulnerable to gun violence in recent years. Imposing location-based restrictions on carrying guns does not conflict with the Second Amendment, allowing states to have flexibility that they need to protect their communities.

Attorney General Bonta continues efforts to support and defend commonsense, constitutional gun laws that have been shown to save lives. Just this week Attorney General Bonta secured a stay pending appeal of a dangerous and misguided decision by a district court striking down California’s large-capacity magazine ban. 

Attorney General Bonta stands with state and local governments in efforts to enact laws that protect the public safety of their communities. The Attorney General has filed or joined state coalitions to file a number of amicus briefs, including:

• In October 2023, leading 17 attorneys general in support of Hawaii’s request to the Ninth Circuit to rehear an appeal defending Hawaii’s ban on butterfly knives.
• In September 2023, defending Montgomery County, Maryland’s law prohibiting the carrying of firearms in certain sensitive places.
• In July 2023, defending New Jersey’s law protecting the public from gun violence in sensitive places, through a brief filed in July 2023.
• In January 2023, defending the state of New York’s gun safety laws,  in support of New York’s reasonable restrictions on who may obtain a concealed carry permit and prohibitions on the carry of guns in sensitive places and in support of the state’s regulation prohibiting the carrying of firearms in places of worship.
• In April 2023, supporting New Jersey’s defense against a legal challenge to its firearm-related public nuisance statute and states’ rights to enact commonsense laws to protect the public from gun violence. 
• In September 2022, urging a district court to uphold the District of Columbia and states’ authority to regulate firearms on public transit systems and protect communities seeking access to safe public transportation.

Attorney General Bonta has, alongside Governor Gavin Newsom and Senator Anthony Portantino, advanced legislation to strengthen California’s existing concealed carry laws. Senate Bill 2 (SB 2), which was signed into law on September 26 and goes into effect on January 1, 2024, is consistent with the U.S. Supreme Court decision in New York Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, and would further protect the public safety of Californians by specifying who may obtain a CCW license, limiting the possession of firearms in certain sensitive locations, and advancing safety through stronger training requirements on the safe handling and storage of firearms.

A copy of the brief can be found here.

Ninth Circuit grants state’s request for a stay of the misguided district court decision 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced that an en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted California’s request for a stay of a district court decision striking down the state’s large-capacity magazine ban. Large-capacity magazines are firearm magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The en banc court’s order, which was issued today, concludes that the state is likely to succeed on the merits in defending the large-capacity restrictions and that maintaining the restrictions pending appeal is in the best interest of the public safety of Californians. 

“We are relieved that the court considered the public safety of Californians in its decision to grant our motion and maintain the restrictions on large-capacity magazines pending a decision on appeal,” said Attorney General Bonta. “With the stay, California’s restrictions on large capacity magazines — a key component in our efforts to fight gun violence — remain in effect. Californians should know that the purchase, manufacture, or transfer of large-capacity magazines is against the law. We will continue to fight for California’s authority to keep our communities safe from weapon enhancements that cause mass casualties. The Supreme Court was clear that New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen does not create a regulatory straitjacket for states and that cases should be evaluated on the text of the Second Amendment and its history and tradition of regulation.”

The Ninth Circuit granted Attorney General Bonta’s motion, which argued that the district court’s application of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bruen is deeply flawed and ignores relevant historical laws. In fact, since Bruen,10 other federal district court decisions have considered Second Amendment challenges to similar restrictions on large-capacity magazines. All but one of those decisions have rejected the challenge. These courts have repeatedly recognized that large-capacity magazines are not protected by the Second Amendment or that restrictions on such magazines are consistent with a historical tradition of regulating particularly dangerous weapons technologies as they spread and cause harm. The district court reached its decision by focusing on the supposed popularity of the technology and by ignoring relevant historical laws, despite the guidance laid out by Bruen.

A copy of the court’s order can be found here. 

Urges Ninth Circuit to rehear panel decision invalidating the ban

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today led a multistate coalition in support of Hawaii’s request to the Ninth Circuit to rehear an appeal defending Hawaii’s ban on butterfly knives. The petition seeks a full en banc review of a panel opinion issued in Teter v. Lopez on August 7, 2023 that invalidated Hawaii’s butterfly knife ban, holding it violates the Second Amendment. In the amicus brief, the coalition argues that the panel’s failure to remand the case after New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen (Bruen) is inconsistent with the approach taken in most other appeals involving Second Amendment challenges in the same posture and that the panel’s application of Bruen is flawed.

“Our coalition has filed an amicus brief in support of Hawaii’s petition for rehearing in Teter v. Lopez,” said Attorney General Bonta. “It is crucial that the courts apply a consistent standard when evaluating Second Amendment challenges to protect and uphold the rights of every American and safeguard the ability of states to enact commonsense gun laws. We stand with Hawaii in seeking further reconsideration by the Ninth Circuit. We will continue to defend constitutional and sensible regulations that protect the public from harm, as well as states’ ability to enact such protections.”

In Hawaii, it is a misdemeanor to manufacture, sell, transport, or possess a butterfly knife, a type of knife where a split handle can fully encase the blade and then rotate open to expose the blade. In 2019, plaintiffs filed a lawsuit challenging the law, arguing it violated their Second Amendment. The district court granted Hawaii’s motion for summary judgment in 2020, to which plaintiffs appealed to the Ninth Circuit. After the Supreme Court issued Bruen in June 2022, Hawaii filed a motion with the Ninth Circuit to vacate the decision below and remand the case to the district court to consider the implications of the Bruen decision in the first instance, or, in the alternative, to order supplemental briefing. In August 2022, a motions panel denied the motion to vacate and remand and directed the parties to file supplemental briefs within 30 days.

In the amicus brief, the coalition of attorneys general:

• Provides examples of the extensive historical analysis typically conducted on remand in post-Bruen cases.
• Identifies how the panel’s legal errors are inconsistent with Bruen, including its discussion about the plain meaning of the term “arms” and its misguided approach to the historical analysis.

In filing the amicus brief, Attorney General Bonta was joined by the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Washington, and the District of Columbia.

A copy of the amicus brief is available here.

SACRAMENTO — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today filed a motion in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to stay a district court decision striking down California’s restrictions on large-capacity magazines. The motion urges the Ninth Circuit to issue a stay of the decision pending appeal to ensure that these vital public safety protections remain in place to prevent gun-related deaths and injuries in California communities while the Ninth Circuit addresses the merits of the case.

“In the past half-century, large-capacity magazines have been used in about three-quarters of gun massacres with 10 or more deaths and in 100 percent of gun massacres with 15 or more deaths,” said Attorney General Bonta. “We will continue to fight for California’s authority to keep our communities safe from weapon enhancements that cause mass casualties. The Supreme Court was clear that Bruen does not create a regulatory straitjacket for states and that cases should be evaluated on the text of the Second Amendment and its history and tradition of regulation. Instead, the district court’s opinion in this case focuses on the purported popularity of large-capacity magazines, and does not properly apply the legal standards set out in Bruen. The court got this dead wrong. The focus should be on the law, period. We will continue to push for commonsense, constitutional regulations that protect Californians’ rights to go about their business without fear of becoming victims of gun violence, while at the same time respecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners.”

The motion urges the Ninth Circuit to stay the district court decision enjoining California’s long-standing restrictions on large-capacity magazines, defined as firearm magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition. In the motion, Attorney General Bonta argues that the district court’s application of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen is deeply flawed and ignores relevant historical laws. In fact, since Bruen, 10 other federal district courts have considered Second Amendment challenges to similar restrictions on large-capacity magazines. All but one of those courts have rejected the challenge. These courts have repeatedly recognized that large-capacity magazines are not protected by the Second Amendment or that restrictions on such magazines are consistent with a historical tradition of regulating particularly dangerous weapons technologies as they spread and cause harm. The district court reached its decision by focusing on the supposed popularity of the technology and by ignoring relevant historical laws despite the guidance laid out by Bruen.

If the district court’s judgment were to take effect, it would create grave, immediate, and irreparable harm to California and its citizens. Without a stay of the district court's order, long-prohibited large-capacity magazines would flood California in large numbers, with no reasonable prospect for their recovery. 

A copy of the motion can be found here.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today filed a lawsuit against nine companies for selling illegal inhalable hemp products in violation of Assembly Bill 45, failing to include warnings required by Proposition 65 for all commercial industrial hemp products, and engaging in unfair business practices. The companies are online sellers of a variety of commercial industrial hemp products containing Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (Delta-9-THC) and/or beta-Myrcene that can be used for vaporizing and smoking, as well as applied to the skin and ingested. Delta 9-THC has numerous health risks, including increased risk of reproductive harm, and developmental delays, and beta-Myrcene is a chemical known to cause cancer. The public’s potential exposure to these compounds in California requires warnings of these risks.

“I want to be clear: The sales of industrial hemp products that do not comply with California law, and the illegal sale of inhalable hemp in California will not be tolerated,” said Attorney General Bonta. “The dangers of these products must be communicated for sale to the public, and the sale of all industrial hemp inhalable products must cease altogether. The California Department of Justice will continue to protect the legitimate businesses who are operating responsibly in this space. There is no room for illegal inhalable hemp products in our state.” 

Proposition 65 prohibits companies from exposing individuals in California to listed carcinogens and/or reproductive toxicants without first providing a clear and reasonable warning. Private citizens may sue under Proposition 65 if they first serve a notice on the company and on the Attorney General and other public enforcers, and no public enforcer has taken action within 60 days. In May and June of 2023, one Proposition 65 private enforcer, Biosphere, issued a number of 60-day notices to the companies alleging that their sale of commercial hemp products exposes California consumers to Delta-9-THC and beta-Myrcene, without a Proposition 65 warning. In addition, the notices alleged that some of the companies were selling inhalable or smokable hemp products in violation of Assembly Bill 45, which took effect in October 2021, and prohibits the sale of inhalable or smokable hemp products to consumers in California. 

The complaint, filed in Alameda County Superior Court, requests the court to block further sale of the illegal inhalable hemp products by the companies, as well as to block the sale of all other industrial hemp products that do not contain appropriate legally sufficient Proposition 65 warnings and apply monetary damages and penalties for both violations committed during prior sales. The complaint alleges the following companies have violated AB 45, Proposition 65, and California Unfair Competition Law through the sale of these products:

• G.E.T. Agriculture LTD
• The Hempacco Company, Inc.
• Cheef Holdings (Cheef Botanicals)
• IHF Online LLC (Industrial Hemp Farms)
• Eagle Moon Hemp, LLC (Eagle Moon Hemp)
• Eagle Moon Farm, LLC (Eagle Moon Farm)
• EMH Wholesale, LLC (EMH)
• Berkshire CBD dba Cannaflower (Cannaflower)
• Berkshire Farm Collective (Berkshire) 

A copy of the complaint can be found here.

Attorney General Bonta is committed to protecting California’s legal cannabis markets. On August 29, Attorney General Bonta signed an agreement with the City of Fresno, making it the first jurisdiction to participate in the California Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Cannabis Administrative Prosecutor Program (CAPP). The program provides California cities and counties who partner with DOJ legal support to address illegal cannabis activity through administrative enforcement and nuisance abatement. This program builds on enforcement activities already underway. In 2022, Attorney General Bonta debuted a new year-round task force, the Eradication and Prevention of Illicit Cannabis (EPIC) task force, to allow DOJ to build out its cannabis enforcement work and investigate and prosecute civil and criminal cases with a focus on environmental, economic, and labor impacts from illegal cultivation. 

Attorney General Bonta is also committed to protecting the health and safety of Californians through enforcement of the state’s Proposition 65 law. In February 2022, Attorney General Bonta, along with 10 district attorneys, announced a settlement with Perrigo Company and two of its subsidiaries to improve the safety of the company's infant and toddler formula products by putting in place ingredient sourcing and quality control processes to significantly reduce levels of lead in excess of the Proposition 65 warning threshold. Also, in February 2022, Attorney General Bonta issued a consumer alert after testing revealed dangerous levels of lead in a number of dried plum fruit and candy products sold by retailers in California. That same month, Attorney General Bonta also filed a lawsuit against McWane Inc., operating as AB&I, for unlawfully emitting hexavalent chromium into the surrounding community and for failing to provide Proposition 65 warnings to nearby communities. 

Partnership makes Fresno the first in the state to participate in new California DOJ program

FRESNO — Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced an innovative new partnership with the City of Fresno to tackle unlicensed, illegal commercial cannabis activities. The agreement signed today makes the city of Fresno the first in the state to participate in the California Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Cannabis Administrative Prosecutor Program (CAPP). The program provides California cities and counties who partner with DOJ legal support to address illegal cannabis activity through administrative enforcement and nuisance abatement. CAPP will provide vital support to local governments who sign on by increasing the scope of illicit cannabis enforcement; providing resources and education to build enforcement programs; and providing cost-effective evidence collection that could lead to large-scale, statewide prosecution of those involved in illegal cannabis activity. This cooperative effort between DOJ and local jurisdictions leverages the administrative enforcement powers of cities and counties and will supplement the important criminal and civil enforcement efforts being undertaken by the Department of Cannabis Control and the Governor’s Unified Cannabis Enforcement Task Force, which is led by the Department of Cannabis Control and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

“Complex problems require creative and collaborative solutions,” said Attorney General Rob Bonta. “This innovative new program allows my office to better support local governments in our collective efforts to tackle illegal cannabis activities, and we are confident that this new cost-effective program will have dramatic and measurable effects. I thank the City of Fresno for their partnership and look forward to working together through this new approach to hold participants in the illegal cannabis market accountable.” 

“Our partnership is aimed at assisting the local legitimate cannabis industry and help grow the Fresno’s tax base," said Fresno City Attorney Andrew Janz. "It is my hope that this, first-of-a-kind joint venture between the Fresno City Attorney’s and the Office of the Attorney General will be a model for other large cities. For far too long, these underground operations have targeted children and minors without fear of retribution. This inventive new approach will seek to put an end to that.”

Despite the legalization of cannabis in California in 2016 through the voter-approved Adult Use of Marijuana Act, unlicensed cannabis activities remain a significant problem in the state. In fact, illegal operators make up the majority of California cannabis activity. The city of Fresno, like many communities throughout California, is impacted by the illegal cannabis market — whether it be illegal cultivation, manufacturing, or retail sales.

DOJ, along with state, federal, and local law enforcement partners continue to target illegal cannabis sites and establishments. Through their illegal activities, these operators threaten the environment, violate workers’ rights, harm public safety, and also cause economic harm to legal operators and the state. Throughout the state, law enforcement, including DOJ, have eradicated hundreds of millions of illegal cannabis plants in recent years. In October 2022, Attorney General Bonta provided the results of DOJ’s 2022 seasonal work to eradicate a total of 973,894 cannabis plants from 449 illicit cannabis grow sites in 26 counties across California; seize over 200,000 pounds of processed cannabis and 184 weapons; remove over 33 tons of cultivation infrastructure, 538.2 tons of fertilizer, 622.2 miles of water line, 33.4 gallons of hazardous/restricted use poisons, 1,180 20-pound propane tanks, and 45 dams or illegally constructed reservoirs and water diversions. Also in 2022, Attorney General Bonta announced a new year-round task force, the Eradication and Prevention of Illicit Cannabis (EPIC) task force, to allow DOJ to build out its cannabis enforcement work and investigate and prosecute civil and criminal cases with a focus on environmental, economic, and labor impacts from illegal cultivation. 

The CAPP Program builds on this work by adding an additional strategy through partnerships with local jurisdictions. By treating illegal cannabis activity as a public nuisance, a land-use issue, and like any other illegal business practice, DOJ's new partnership with local jurisdictions such as Fresno, will use cost-effective, expedient, and efficient administrative enforcement methods that will hold those who profit by illegal cannabis activity accountable through the issuance of citations, notices of violations, and orders to abate the illegal activity. If cited, illegal operators will have an opportunity to voluntarily shut down their operation, or face the eradication of unlicensed commercial cannabis cultivation or the cessation of unlicensed retail or manufacturing activity, as well as an order authorizing the recovery of enforcement costs. 

DOJ, through its Cannabis Control Section, will provide the following support to the city of Fresno, and other local jurisdictions who sign onto the CAPP program to address illegal cultivation by:

• Provide attorneys to act as administrative prosecutors before local administrative hearing bodies or officers and, where necessary, assist with the development of procedures for expedited administrative enforcement. 
• Assist with investigative services through the EPIC program and its partnerships with other agencies. 
• If necessary, perform the administrative work necessary to provide notices, including assisting in facilitating administrative procedures, and assisting with logistical issues through the use of private process servers, contract code compliance officers, and abatement contractors. 

The program is designed to be self-funded as DOJ staff, in coordination with the local government, will seek to recover costs through fines, enforcement actions, stipulated administrative orders, settlements, and abatement liens. Any funding received that exceeds the cost of services provided as part of this MOU will be held by the city of Fresno.  

Learn more about the about CAPP by visiting http://oag.ca.gov/Capp.