Update: Chill out folks, it's only pot. It isn't like he was caught using caffeine.
A Federal Judge claims Andrew Sullivan's recent arrest on a marijuana charge raises fundamental issues of law, though the charges have been dismissed. The judge believes the dismissal raises equal protection issues. However, he was forced to dismiss the charges at the DA's request, though feeling that justice was not being served. Hmm
The rest of the post excerpted below is here. The full decision can be read here.
Political commentator, author and writer for The Atlantic magazine Andrew M. Sullivan won’t have to face charges stemming from a recent pot bust at the Cape Cod National Seashore — but a federal judge isn’t happy about it.
U. S. Magistrate Judge Robert B. Collings says in his decision that the case is an example of how sometimes “small cases raise issues of fundamental importance in our system of justice.”
While marijuana possession may have been decriminalized, Sullivan, who owns a home in Provincetown, made the mistake of being caught by a park ranger with a controlled substance on National Park Service lands, a federal misdemeanor.
The ranger issued Sullivan a citation, which required him either to appear in U.S. District Court or, in essence, pay a $125 fine.
But the U.S. Attorney’s Office sought to dismiss the case. Both the federal prosecutor and Sullivan’s attorney said it would have resulted in an “adverse effect” on an unspecified “immigration status” that Sullivan, a British citizen, is applying for.
At the hearing, Collings observed that Sullivan would still have to state on his application that he had been charged with a crime, and he asked both the prosecutor and Sullivan’s attorney, Robert Delahunt Jr. (cousin of U. S. Rep. William D. Delahunt), for more information about why paying the $125 would have “any additional adverse effect.”
When no attorney could fully answer the question beyond citing advice from immigration lawyers, Collings requested that Delahunt submit a brief on the issue. But before Delahunt could reply, Assistant U. S. Attorney James F. Lang jumped in and said that Collings had no power to inquire why the U.S. Attorney had decided to have the charge dismissed.


I blame Trig Palin.
Posted by: JWF | Friday, September 11, 2009 at 10:48 AM
Well, Andrew is a pot-head. That explains a LOT.....
Posted by: zipity | Friday, September 11, 2009 at 10:58 AM
Of course,there couldn't possibly be any political influence being exerted to protect Obama's #1 media butt-boy from possibly getting deported.
Posted by: Sam | Friday, September 11, 2009 at 11:54 AM
DId Andrew do any conspiracy posts on Sarah Palin giving special treatment to Levi's mom?
Oh, he did!!!
04 Jan 2009 04:18 pm
News From Alaska
Accusations of political meddling in the case of Sherry Johnston, Palin's daughter's kinda-mother-in-law.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/01/news-from-alask.html
Posted by: Peach | Friday, September 11, 2009 at 12:07 PM
One would think that an OBGYN like Dr. Sullivan would know the potential medical dangers of frequent marijuana use.
Posted by: Jamie Lockett | Friday, September 11, 2009 at 12:14 PM
Hmm, did Andrew and Teddy engage in pot smoking in Nantucket before Teddy's death last month? Did that alleged pot smoking contribute to Teddy's death? Is the media covering up this marijuana triste to polish the image of Teddy?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Posted by: eaglewingz08 | Friday, September 11, 2009 at 01:16 PM
Update: Chill out folks, it's only pot. It isn't like he was caught using caffeine.
That was snort out loud funny!
Posted by: sarainitaly | Friday, September 11, 2009 at 03:07 PM
Say, didn't Sullivan make a big deal about the US Attorneys story a couple years back? And isn't he now relying on the good will of a US Attorney to not prosecute him?
Posted by: Ernst Blofeld | Friday, September 11, 2009 at 03:35 PM
You can't blame Trig Palin. Its Bush's fault!
Posted by: lonestar | Friday, September 11, 2009 at 03:53 PM
Isn't that Barney Frank's district? Maybe Andrew Sullivan was in possession of a teenage boy. Isn't Eric Holder (per the NY Times last Sunday) hiring a bunch of lawyers to look into disparate treatment? First case -- radical left wing blogger obsessed with baby boys!
Of course, Howie Kurtz will once again (falsely) identify Andrew Sullivan as a conservative blogger. How annoying. All those pro-Obama, anti-war, pro-gay marriage, pro gays in the military, pro-Joe Klein, pro-MSNBC, anti-Cheney, anti-Bush, anti-Fox conservative, Trig-birther obsessed conservative bloggers, and Andrew "medical marijuana" Sullivan is just one of them.
Posted by: Karen | Friday, September 11, 2009 at 05:03 PM
1. Money traded hands at some point, which is yet more evidence of the corruption bred by and inherent in the war on (some) drugs.
2. If I elect to embalm my brain cells with the occasional snort of whiskey (which, from the standpoints of ethics and health risk, is the exact same thing that Andy did) I'll do so at home, not in a national park where alcohol possession (also) is against the law. If possession was decriminalized at his place of residence, then why not fire up at home, where he could do so to his little heart's content? The aforementioned whiskey goes down just fine and dandy in the privacy of my own living room.
I guess I just don't get the whole 'recreational drug use' thing. I won't hassle anyone about it if that happens to be their bag, but I'll never understand it.
I have a doctorate in clinical pharmacy, FWIW.
Posted by: Trouble | Friday, September 11, 2009 at 05:49 PM
Andrew Sullivan received preferential treatment because he abandoned his political principles to endorse Barack Obama.
It's a crude payoff to Sullivan for supporting Obama in 2008 and today.
Although Obama's big-spending, budget-deficit-exploding policies are completely the opposite of what Andrew Sullivan claims to believe in, Sullivan continues to slavishly support Obama and back his massive spending increases -- such as his health-care plan, which the Congressional Budget Office says will increase the deficit, and his stimulus package, which the Congressional Budget Office says will actually shrink the economy "in the long run."
Posted by: Jody | Friday, September 11, 2009 at 07:01 PM
"British citizen"?! I thought a citizen was someone who lives in a republic . . . shouldn't Sully be identified as a British subject of the crown? So far as I'm concerned he's welcome to stay, work and pay taxes. Even if I do think he's gone coo-coo for coco puffs . . .
Posted by: chris | Friday, September 11, 2009 at 10:32 PM