High School Newspaper Canceled for Marijuana Legalization Editorial

The Big Spring Independent School District in Texas decided to censor Big Spring High School's semester closing issue of the school's paper, The Corral, because it contained a pro-marijuana legalization editorial written by a student. District Superintendent Steven Saldivar took the action because he said the editorial ran contrary to the district's long-stated position on drug usage.

"We were embarrassed by it," Saldivar said. "At the same time we're trying to get kids to see the dangers of using drugs, (The Corral) ran that editorial. In no way do we advocate legalizing drugs, so we didn't feel this was something that was in our best interests to support."

Recently graduated Editor-in-Chief Marisa Nieto doesn't see why the editorial is considered inappropriate.

"I just couldn't believe that someone was making such a big deal out of such a little thing in my eyes," she said. "It was just an editorial on legalizing marijuana and giving facts on it. That's it."

It would seem that students have a right to freedom of speech. However, in the 1980's, the Supreme Court ruled public schools have the final say when it comes to student publication content. In protest, Big Spring High School journalism teacher Bill Riggs resigned. Some Big Spring residents were also unhappy with the decision.

"Why are we going to only provide them with a minimum of what the ideas and concepts of what journalism are?" Big Spring resident, Lisa Trejo, said. "So they can be prepared for what; half-way (knowledge) of how to do their job when they get into the real world, because their ISD wanted to protect them? That's not fair."

A zero-tolerance policy on the open discussion of drug use and prohibition is really a step backwards. It is this kind of close mindedness that prevents us from collectively progressing towards a more just and compassionate future. 


While the Supreme Court  has ruled that school districts can censor school publications, the Court has also ruled, thanks in large part to SSDP, that free speech about drug policy reform is protected in schools and students can not be punished for discussing drug policy. 


We hope to see a SSDP chapter start at Big Spring High School.

13 Year Old American Teenagers Recruited as Assassins for Mexican Drug Cartel

Rosalio Reta and his friend, Gabriel Cardona, were members of a three-person cell of American teenagers working as cartel hit men in the United States, according to prosecutors.

...In interviews with CNN, Laredo police detectives and prosecutors told how Cardona and Reta were recruited by the cartel to be assassins after they began hitting the cantinas and clubs just across the border. [CNN]

The Mexican drug cartel, fueled by the constant demand for illicit drugs and armed with guns supplied by America has unsurprisingly been recruiting American teenagers to fight their bloody battles, starting as early as 13 years old.

Both teenagers received six-month military-style training on a Mexican ranch. Investigators say Cardona and Reta were paid $500 a week each as a retainer, to sit and wait for the call to kill. Then they were paid up to $50,000 and 2 kilos of cocaine for carrying out a hit.

The teenagers lived in several safe houses around Laredo and drove around town in a $70,000 Mercedes-Benz.

So let’s get this straight. They have our guns, they have our money, they supply us with our drugs, they control our border, and now they have more power over our kids than parents ever would. I doubt you’d find a parent out there who’d be willing to pay their child $500 a week for sitting around, though at this point, maybe they should start looking into it.

I hate to be repetitive in my posts, but how are people not panicking? Do they not understand the idea of cause and effect, or do they need their North American geography refreshed?

There are sleeper cells in the U.S.," said Detective Garcia. "They're here, they're here in the United States.

Think about it, what else could the cartel sell that would give them so much easy money and an overwhelming amount of control? Chocolate candy bars? I don’t think so. Everyone wants drugs. No matter how many “Just Say No” campaigns we may feed our tax dollars into, we will not be able to turn American into a “drug free” nation. Instead, we need to legalize, regulate, control, and educate the public about the real harms drugs can cause and how to use responsibly if they’re going to use.

The solution is right in front of us, but some of us are too scared to even talk about it. Unfortunately at this point, there's so much more to be scared about than the word "legalization".

Deadly Disaster in Mexico

I think people put it best when they say we'll need to end the drug war soon enough out of pure necessity. Take, for instance, this video of what's going on in Mexico:



More than 5,300 people were killed in drug cartel violence last year. Reporters are rightfully horrified to have their name linked to any Mexican drug cartel story. Innocent children are being maliciously slain. The Texas Guard has gone on high alert for the first time in history.

Yet, when asked on Fox News why the people in Mexico are protesting the army that was sent out to supposedly help them, Senator Dan Patrick of Texas replies,

"Well, we believe Bill, that it's the drug cartels who paid the people to protest."

Ignorant? Pathetic? Too horrified to face the truth? Who knows. What we do know is that if Mexico doesn't legalize and regulate drugs soon and take away the drug cartel's major source of power, there will be no way out.

The National Drug Intelligence Center has already concluded in its National Drug Threat Assessment 2009 that "Mexico drug trafficking organizations represent the greatest organized crime threat to the United States."

Lawmakers in Texas are currently worrying about a flood of Mexican refugees attempting to escape the violence pouring into their state, but nobody really seems to know what to do.

"This violence is happening because the [Felipe] Calderon administration is doing the right thing by cracking down on powerful drug cartels," Kudwa said in a statement. "The cartels are, predictably, fighting back to protect their lucrative criminal livelihood..."[Fox News]

How can people continue to blatantly overlook the solution and honestly believe that the violent tactics being used are the "right thing" to do? Obviously these tactics are failing everyone except for the drug cartels. Obviously we need to come up with a better plan. Obviously, we need to talk legalization.

SSDP Member Testifies in El Paso

While my last post made light of the situation in El Paso, this event proved to be an important day for drug policy. Even though mayor Cook's veto was not overridden by the city council, councilman O'Rourke's goal to stimulate dialogue about ending prohibition was achieved. Over 40 people testified their support or disagreement with the veto's override. It seemed like most supported keeping all options on the table and not limiting discussion - whether or not they personally supported legalization.

Nubia Legarda, a University of Texas at El Paso student, testified on behalf of SSDP in support of the amendment that would include the discussion of ending prohibition as an option to curb the escalating violence in Juarez. Nubia has family in Juarez and provided a touching and articulate testimony that made SSDP proud!

Immediately after the city council meeting, Nubia made a $10 donatation to SSDP! Thank her by matching her donation today!

El Paso Can't Decide if it's OK to Talk About Drug Legalization

By now you are probably aware of the recent resolution, written and passed by the El Paso city council, that included an amendment encouraging that ending drug prohibition be discussed. The resolution was aimed at addressing and drawing attention to the rising violence occurring in the city of Juárez, Mexico which borders El Paso, Texas.

After passing unanimously, the resolution was quickly vetoed by El Paso mayor John Cook, who reasoned that "It is not realistic to believe that the U.S. Congress will seriously consider any broad-based debate on the legalization of narcotics," Cook added. "That position is not consistent with the community standards both locally and nationally."

Cook goes on to say "The whole purpose of the resolution was to get national attention to the violence in Juárez," he said. "After it was amended, the focus was placed instead on legalizing drugs in the United States."

I disagree and think that had the amendment not been added, no one would have heard of this resolution and little more attention would have been drawn to the prohibition related violence in Juárez. Beto O'Rourke, the city councilman that added the amendment, speaks quite eloquently about the purpose of bringing legalization into the discussion. He makes it very clear that the council did not vote in support of legalization, but in support of evaluating the relationship between the rise of violence in Juárez and U.S. drug policy.

More than 20 people have already been killed in Juárez since the new year started. The details of these murders are so grotesque and frightening, it's hard to believe the Mayor wouldn't even support the discussion of drug decriminalization.

The council is set to vote on an override of the veto this Tuesday.

The El Paso Times has an article on the vote and a follow up opinion in support of the council's vote. Be sure to weigh in on the comments section and also to vote YES on the poll located near the end of this article. LEAP's Terry Nelson had an excellent op-ed printed in the El Paso times. Again, please leave comments of support for the resolution, Terry Nelson's op-ed, and while your at it, throw in a mention of your favorite student drug policy reform organization.

In an unrelated story, El Paso's "most wanted fugitive" is:

EL PASO -- A 23-year-old man who was arrested for shoplifting at Wal-Mart while eating potato wedges and popcorn chicken he didn't pay for, is the most-wanted fugitive this week, an El Paso County Sheriff's Office spokesman said.