Maryland Gov. Moore Grants 7,000 More Pardons In Cannabis Equity Push
OCTOBER 09: Governor Wes Moore speaks at an event in New York City. (Photo by Mike Coppola/Getty ... More Images for TIME)
Recently Gov. Wes Moore announced a series of actions designed to close the racial wealth gap in Maryland's cannabis industry, including nearly 7,000 additional pardons for simple possession. The designations—seeking to right the wrongs of systemic flaws in the state—are set to take effect Tuesday.
At a Juneteenth event last week, in front of a congregation at Bethel AME Church in Cambridge, the governor announced new Just Community designations to prioritize up to $400 million in competitive state investments in communities that have been disproportionately impacted through the years by cannabis policies. This follows the governor's clemency order he signed last year to pardon 175,000 convictions for possession.
'We know the racial wealth gap affects all of us. It hurts our economy; it restrains job growth and it limits our potential as a state,' said Gov. Moore. 'If you want a growing economy, you have to make sure it is an inclusive one. We cannot afford to simply 'meet' about the situation before us and delay progress—we need action. Together, we are going to continue the work of repair with action that delivers results.'
The pardons will impact 6,938 convictions for simple cannabis possession. It's the largest pardon for misdemeanor cannabis possession charges for any state in the country, the governor's office announced. The additional pardons were coordinated with the Maryland Judiciary to review cases since the first order was signed last June.
Maryland Just Communities and Other Actions
Maryland's Department of Housing and Community Development created recommendations to designate 419 of Maryland's 1,463 census tracts as Just Communities, made up of 17 counties and the City of Baltimore. The five-year designation will 'create priority consideration' for competitive state funding in FY 2026.
'The first-of-its-kind designation of Maryland's Just Communities is a critical step in lifting the barriers that create separate and unequal neighborhoods all across our state,' said Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development Secretary Jake Day. 'Fostering fairer development and addressing inequity not only creates healthier, more resilient communities, but generates lasting social and economic well-being for all.'
Per the governor's Expungement Reform Act, all pardoned cannabis possession offenses will be removed from public view by January 31, 2026. The Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services will also address pardoned convictions on criminal background checks.
Beyond cannabis, the governor announced a $1.3 billion investment in Maryland's Historically Black Colleges and Universities designed to help 1,500 Black Marylanders pursue homeownership. It also supports Maryland's Black-owned businesses with over $816 million in state procurement awards and will launch an effort to end concentrated poverty through the ENOUGH initiative.
Disparities in cannabis ownership persist: For instance, only 10 percent of investors in Maryland's cannabis industry are people of color, data from the Maryland Medical Cannabis Commission (MMCC) revealed in 2020. Actions like these seek to close the racial gap, first and foremost in the way cannabis convictions are addressed.
Gov. Moore's administration has initiated several other equity-driven initiatives based in action to deliver results, including the launch of the Community Investment Venture Fund to help Maryland entrepreneurs of color secure access to capital to grow their businesses. The fund's first round of funding awards to address inequitable property appraisal values through the UPLIFT initiative and $4 million in funding to strengthen high-skill workforce development through the Roads to Careers program.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
36 minutes ago
- CNN
Republican plans to overhaul Medicaid are already shaking up the 2026 midterms
Senate Republicans have yet to finalize their version of President Donald Trump's sweeping domestic policy proposal, but GOP lawmakers up for reelection in 2026 are bracing for the political impact of the bill's Medicaid cuts. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine is pushing for a provider relief fund. Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina has warned GOP leaders about how many in his state could lose care. And Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa has picked up a crop of Democratic challengers campaigning off her 'Well, we all are going to die' response to a town hall protester. Tens of thousands of people could lose coverage in each of those three senators' states, according to a KFF analysis on the version of the bill passed by the Republican-led House last month. Beleaguered Democrats, meanwhile, hope that laser-focusing on health care will help them chip away at the Republicans' 53-seat Senate majority and take back the House. A key part of Democratic messaging has been to tie the Medicaid cuts, which would largely affect low-income Americans, to tax breaks for the wealthy. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the changes would reduce federal Medicaid spending by roughly $800 billion over 10 years, largely by instituting work requirements for certain adults eligible for Medicaid and postponing a Biden administration rule intended to simplify enrolling and renewing coverage. 'It is crazy politics for them to do this,' said Brad Woodhouse, a longtime Democratic operative and executive director of Protect Our Care, a health care advocacy group that launched a $10 million campaign this year to oppose Medicaid cuts. 'Everyone is going to be unhappy with this bill, unless you're a very high net worth individual: a millionaire, a multi-millionaire, a billionaire, or a large corporation.' Many Republicans have argued that the cuts to Medicaid are meant to sustain the program for those who need it most. They're also betting that the rest of the bill will be more popular. Paul Shumaker, a longtime North Carolina GOP strategist who advises Tillis and other Republican leaders in the state, said he was 'bullish' on the midterm elections because he believes voters will support Republican arguments about rooting waste, fraud and abuse out of Medicaid. He also thinks voters will back other policies in the legislative package like cutting taxes on tips and overtime pay and raising the child tax credit. 'Democrats are basically staking themselves out on issues that resonate with one-third of the voters, whereas Republicans have staked themselves out on issues that resonate with two-thirds of the voters,' Shumaker said. 'They have put themselves into a box.' Democrats are betting that a narrow focus on the bill's health care provisions will have the most impact, even in states like Iowa, where Democrats are hoping to oust Ernst, contest an open governor's seat and two US House seats. Ernst, who is seeking a third term next year, picked up a Democratic challenger earlier this month after she told a town hall protester 'well, we all are going to die' in response to comments about cuts to Medicaid. Ernst doubled down on the remarks in a video filmed in a cemetery. An Ernst spokesperson pointed to Ernst's full comments, in which she said she wants to leave Medicaid funding for the 'most vulnerable' and 'those that are eligible.' 'While Democrats fearmonger against strengthening the integrity of Medicaid, Senator Ernst is focused on protecting Medicaid for the most vulnerable,' reads a statement from the senator's office. 'She will continue to stand up for Iowa's rural hospitals, clinics, and community health centers that serve our state.' Iowa state Rep. J.D. Scholten announced his campaign soon after Ernst's town hall, becoming the second candidate in the race after Democrat Nathan Sage, who announced in April. Some election forecasters shifted the race slightly – from solid to likely Republican — after he launched his campaign. 'We're seeing people, just everyday people calling Ernst 'Joni Hearse,'' Scholten told CNN. 'You just get that sense, politically, that if we can tap into that … this is where our foot's in the door to a lot of voters who have not been voting Democrat.' It's also motivating Democratic voters in the state. Melinda Magdalene Wings, a 65-year-old retired hospice nurse from Iowa City, Iowa, told CNN she's worried cuts to Medicaid funding would impact the assisted living home where her 86-year-old parents, including her mother who has advanced dementia, reside. In February, she started writing her representatives about the bill. 'As Iowa's elected officials, I expect them to vote for what's best for Iowa — for the people of Iowa — and not for this administration,' she said. 'Money going to millionaires doesn't make any sense.' A handful of Senate Republicans, including Tillis and Collins, have raised concerns about the impact the reconciliation bill could have on their states, particularly a Senate proposal that would limit how much states can raise provider taxes, a key source of revenue. The provider tax provision is among a handful that Senate Republicans are revising after the chamber's parliamentarian ruled they didn't meet the strict budget rules that allow the legislation to pass with a simple 51-vote majority. 'I've been very concerned about the cuts in Medicaid and the impact on my state, but other states as well,' Collins told CNN's Manu Raju on Tuesday. 'I've also been concerned about the health of rural hospitals, nursing homes, health centers and have been working on a provider relief fund. But that doesn't offset the problem with the Medicaid cuts.' Tillis said Tuesday that while the bill's Medicaid cuts are 'directionally right,' Republicans 'have to do it at a pace that states can absorb, or we're gonna have bad outcomes, political and policy.' Tensions within the Senate GOP caucus have also spilled out into the open. Kentucky Sen. Mitch McConnell told colleagues with concerns about the bill during a private GOP conference meeting that 'failure is not an option' and people in their states raising concerns about the bill's Medicaid provisions would 'get over it,' according to a report from Punchbowl News. Democrats quickly latched onto the comments. 'I hope Republicans can 'get over it' when they lose their seats in the midterms,' DNC communications director Rosemary Boeglin said in a statement. A spokesperson for McConnell said the senator was referring to people who are 'abusing' Medicaid and 'should be working,' and the need to 'withstand Democrats' scare tactics' on the issue. 'Senator McConnell was urging his fellow members to highlight that message to our constituents and remind them that we should all be against waste, fraud, and abuse while working to protect our rural hospitals and have safety nets in place for people that need it,' the statement read. Nearly 8 million more people would be uninsured in 2034 because of the Medicaid provisions in a version of the bill passed by the House last month, according to an analysis from the Congressional Budget Office. Most of those cuts come from the legislation's work requirement, which calls for able-bodied adults without dependent children to work or volunteer at least 80 hours a month. A proposal unveiled by the Senate this month would expand that requirement to adults with children over the age of 14, which would likely result in even more people losing coverage. Republicans have argued they are reforming Medicaid to sustain the program for people who need it the most. They've focused their messaging on work requirements, which are popular with voters, and policies that would penalize states for covering undocumented immigrants with their own funds. 'President Trump and Senate Republicans are working to protect Medicaid for Americans who truly need it,' Nick Puglia, a National Republican Senatorial Committee spokesperson, said in a statement to CNN. 'Voters will reject Democrats' lies, fearmongering, and attempts to use taxpayer benefits to subsidize illegal aliens and their open border policies.' Republicans are also framing a vote against the reconciliation bill, which extends the individual income tax cuts in the 2017 GOP tax policy overhaul that are set to expire at the end of the year, as a vote for tax increases. 'I think in the end, this bill will play out on the Republicans saying, 'We got it done. We passed it, the economy's good. We spared you from having to pay more taxes,'' David McIntosh, the president of Club for Growth, told reporters recently. 'And then pivot to say, 'but if my Democrat opponent gets elected, they want to undo it … vote for us so that we can stop them from raising your taxes.'' A Washington Post-Ipsos poll released June 17, before the Senate released its framework, found overwhelming support for some provisions in the bill. Seventy-two percent of Americans support raising the child tax credit, 71% support extending tax cuts for individuals making less than $100,000 and 65% support eliminating taxes on tips. But, as whole, 42% of Americans oppose the bill, while 23% support it and 34% said they had no opinion. A KFF poll released the same day found that 64% of adults had an unfavorable view of the House's version of the bill. The poll found that 68% of adults – including 51% of Democrats, 66% of independents and 88% of Republicans – support work requirements, but that support for work requirements dropped to 35% when adults heard the argument that 'most people on Medicaid are already working' or unable to work. Democrats have described the work requirements as an intentional bureaucratic hurdle. Health policy experts and Democratic campaigns have also focused on the ripple effects cuts to Medicaid funding could have on the system as a whole, including rural hospitals and nursing home care. 'A lot of Medicaid patients seek care from the same providers or same types of providers,' said Adrianna McIntyre, an assistant professor of health policy and politics at Harvard University. 'So when you're pulling dollars out of the system and away from those providers, it doesn't just hurt the patients who no longer have insurance through Medicaid.' CNN's Manu Raju, Alison Main and Fredreka Schouten contributed to this report.
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Even as markets rally, Trump's policymaking causes market angst
By Suzanne McGee (Reuters) -As Wall Street puts April's tariff shakeout in the rearview mirror and indexes set record highs, investors remain wary of U.S. President Donald Trump's rapid-fire, sometimes chaotic policymaking process and see the rally as fragile. The S&P 500 and Nasdaq composite index advanced past their previous highs into uncharted territory on Friday. Yet traders and investors remain wary of what may lie ahead. Trump's April 2 reciprocal tariffs on major trading partners roiled global financial markets and put the S&P 500 on the threshold of a bear market designation when it ended down 19% from its February 19 record-high close. This week's leg up came after a U.S.-brokered ceasefire between Israel and Iran brought an end to a 12-day air battle that had sparked a jump in crude prices and raised worries of higher inflation. But a relief rally started after Trump responded to the initial tariff panic that gripped financial markets by backing away from his most draconian plans. JP Morgan Chase, in the midyear outlook published on Wednesday by its global research team, said the environment was characterized by "extreme policy uncertainty." "Nobody wants to end a week with a risk-on tilt to their portfolios," said Art Hogan, market strategist at B. Riley Wealth. "Everyone is aware that just as the market feels more certain and confident, a single wildcard policy announcement could change everything," even if it does not ignite a firestorm of the kind seen in April. Part of this wariness from institutional investors may be due to the magnitude of the 6% S&P 500 rally that followed Trump's re-election last November and culminated in the last new high posted by the index in February, said Joseph Quinlan, market strategist at Bank of America. "We were out ahead of our skis," Quinlan said. A focus on deregulation, tax cuts and corporate deals brought out the "animal spirits," he said. Then came the tariff battles. Quinlan remains upbeat on the outlook for U.S. stocks and optimistic that a new global trade system could lead to U.S. companies opening new markets and posting higher revenues and profits. But he said he is still cautious. "There will still be spikes of volatility around policy unknowns." Overall, measures of market volatility are now well below where they stood at the height of the tariff turmoil in April, with the CBOE VIX index now at 16.3, down from a 52.3 peak on April 8. UNSTABLE MARKETS "Our clients seem to have become somewhat desensitized to the headlines, but it's still an unhealthy market, with everyone aware that trading could happen based on the whims behind a bunch of" social media posts, said Jeff O'Connor, head of market structure, Americas, at Liquidnet, an institutional trading platform. Trading in the options market shows little sign of the kind of euphoria that characterized stock market rallies of the recent past. "On the institutional front, we do see a lot of hesitation in chasing the market rally," Stefano Pascale, head of U.S. equity derivatives research at Barclays, said. Unlike past episodes of sharp market selloffs, institutional investors have largely stayed away from employing bullish call options to chase the market higher, Pascale said, referring to plain options that confer the right to buy at a specified future price and date. Bid/ask spreads on many stocks are well above levels O'Connor witnessed in late 2024, while market depth - a measure of the size and number of potential orders - remains at the lowest levels he can recall in the last 20 years. "The best way to describe the markets in the last couple of months, even as they have recovered, is to say they are unstable," said Liz Ann Sonders, market strategist at Charles Schwab. She said she is concerned that the market may be reaching "another point of complacency" akin to that seen in March. "There's a possibility that we'll be primed for another downside move," Sonders addded. Mark Spindel, chief investment officer at Potomac River Capital in Washington, said he came up with the term "Snapchat presidency" to describe the whiplash effect on markets of the president's constantly changing policies on markets. "He feels more like a day trader than a long-term institutional investor," Spindel said, alluding to Trump's policy flip-flops. "One minute he's not going to negotiate, and the next he negotiates." To be sure, traders seem to view those rapid shifts in course as a positive in the current rally, signaling Trump's willingness to heed market signals. "For now, at least, stocks are willing to overlook the risks that go along with this style and lack of consistent policies, and give the administration a break as being 'market friendly'," said Steve Sosnick, market strategist at Interactive Brokers. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'Deceit, dishonesty, betrayal': The wrongful conviction that haunted Johnnie Cochran
He was an uncommonly dangerous man, in the FBI's eyes, a combat-toughened killer who had returned from Vietnam to wage war on the Establishment. "We are going to drive the pigs out of the community,' Elmer "Geronimo" Pratt, the 21-year-old leader of the Black Panther Party in Los Angeles, told a reporter in 1970. Pratt was stout, compact and level-eyed, with a raspy drawl bespeaking his childhood on the Louisiana bayou. He envisioned a violent end at the hands of police, whom he cast as an occupying army in African American neighborhoods. "The next time you see me, I might be dead.' When he went on trial in 1972 — on charges he murdered a white schoolteacher, execution-style, during a robbery — he insisted he was being framed. His defense attorney, a young Johnnie Cochran Jr., initially dismissed Pratt's talk as paranoia. But Cochran would later describe the case as 'a twilight zone of deceit, dishonesty, betrayal and official corruption.' Pratt's conviction kept him behind bars for 27 years, and the case haunted Cochran, who believed Pratt was innocent and who had made a mistake at trial that prosecutors skillfully exploited. In the authorities' war against perceived subversives, it would be years before it became clear how brazenly they had cheated. 'It looked on the surface like a really straightforward murder case,' said Stuart Hanlon, now 76, the radical San Francisco defense attorney who took up Pratt's appeal as a law student and pursued it doggedly for decades. The victim was Caroline Olsen, 27, who was with her husband on a Santa Monica tennis court in December 1968 when a pair of gunmen approached demanding money. The men ordered the couple to lie face down, then began opening fire. She was fatally wounded; her husband was struck but survived. The robbers got $18. The investigation stalled, and Pratt was not a suspect until 1970, when Julius "Julio' Butler, a beautician and former police officer, implicated him. Butler had been a Panther himself, and had resented Pratt's elevation as Los Angeles leader. The state's star witness, Butler testified that Pratt had dropped by his beauty shop and announced he was going on a 'mission' and later pointed to an article about the Santa Monica shooting to confirm it was his doing. Cochran asked Butler if he had ever been a police informant. Butler flatly denied it. Devastatingly for the defense, Olsen's widower pointed to the defendant and said: "That's the man who murdered my wife.' Cochran argued against the reliability of cross-racial witness identification, particularly under conditions of stress, and put on the stand a witness who had seen Pratt in the Bay Area around the time of the killing. He also put on Pratt, who had been decorated for heroism during two tours in Vietnam with the Army, and who showed what Cochran called a 'soldier's contempt' for whomever shot the helpless Olsen in the back. Cochran thought it was a winnable case, but he introduced an exhibit that backfired terribly. It was a Polaroid, given to him by Pratt's brother, who insisted it had been taken a week after the shooting. It showed Pratt with a beard, which contradicted the widower's initial description of the shooter as "a clean-shaven black man.' Prosecutors countered with a Polaroid employee who said the film had not even been manufactured until five months after the crime, a blow to the defense's credibility that left jurors doubting Pratt's other claims. It took jurors 10 days to find him guilty of first-degree murder. The sentence was 25 years to life. "You're wrong. I didn't kill that woman,' Pratt erupted. "You racist dogs.' Pratt spent the next eight years in solitary confinement. He was shuttled among prisons, and eventually allowed conjugal visits; his wife gave birth to two children. At a series of unsuccessful parole hearings, the panel waited for him to say he was sorry. He insisted he hadn't done it. 'The last person I killed,' he would say, 'was in Vietnam.' There was much the authorities had not shared with Pratt's defense team. They did not reveal that Olsen's widower had previously identified another man as the shooter. (The man had been in jail at the time and could not have done it.) Nor did they reveal the scope of the star witness' work as an informant for law enforcement officials. Based on FBI documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, Pratt's lawyers pieced together a picture of Butler's intimate involvement with the FBI, the Los Angeles Police Department and the L.A. County district attorney's office in dozens of cases. To FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, the Panthers had been the most dangerous group in the country, homegrown terrorists with stockpiles of weapons and alarming Maoist rhetoric. His secret COINTELPRO program was a campaign of spying, wiretaps and sabotage aimed at crushing perceived subversives and thwarting 'the coalition of militant black nationalist groups.' 'Geronimo was targeted by the FBI because he was a natural leader,' Hanlon said. As Hanlon pieced together documents, it became clear that Butler had been helping. Rejecting appeal after appeal, however, courts ruled that Butler had not been an informant — he had been 'a contact and nothing more,' according to one judge — and that Pratt did not deserve a new trial. He was still considered dangerous. 'If he chooses to set up a revolutionary organization upon his release from prison, it would certainly be easy for him to do so,' a prosecutor said at one parole hearing. 'He does have this network out there.' When defense lawyers brought their evidence to then-L.A. County Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti in 1993, they presented it as a chance to undo the injustice his predecessors had sanctioned two decades earlier. But Garcetti's review dragged on for years, and the attorneys turned again to the courts. This time, the courts granted a hearing. Because the L.A. County Superior Court bench was recused — the original prosecutor was now an L.A. County judge and a probable witness — the case was transferred to Orange County Superior Court. For Pratt's supporters, this provoked a chill. What hope did they have in a staunchly conservative county? But Judge Everett Dickey surprised them. "It's clear that this is not a typical case," Dickey said. "It cries out for resolution.' This time, Pratt's team was armed with evidence never heard at the original trial. They had the testimony of a retired FBI agent who supported Pratt's claim that he had been in Oakland during the killing. They knew that the D.A.'s office had allowed Butler to plead no contest to four felonies in exchange for probation, around the time he testified against Pratt. And they had an index card, recently discovered by one of Garcetti's investigators in the office files, that listed Butler as a D.A. informant. It was filed under B; it had been there all along. "It had never been turned over to the defense. How could they have not turned this over?' Garcetti said in a recent interview. 'I couldn't find anyone who would fess up to the fact that, 'Yeah, we had that document in the files.'' Still, Garcetti's prosecutors downplayed the card's importance. Butler was not an informant, they argued vehemently, but merely a 'source.' In late 1996, Cochran finally got a chance to confront Butler. He had waited years. Butler had become an attorney and an official at a prominent Los Angeles church. He insisted he had been merely a 'liaison' between law enforcement and the Panthers. Cochran asked him his definition of informant. He admitted he had told the FBI that Pratt had a submachine gun. He said his definition of an informant was someone who supplied accurate information. "So under your own definition, you were informing to the FBI?" Cochran asked. "You could say that," Butler said. Dickey threw out Pratt's conviction, concluding that Butler had lied and that prosecutors had hidden evidence that could have led to Pratt's acquittal. Pratt was released on bail in June 1997, to the cheers of his supporters. "The greatest moment of my legal career,' Cochran called it. Pratt flew home to Morgan City, La., 'to see my mama and my homefolks,' he said. "It wasn't easy getting here.' He said he wanted to hear rain on the tin roof of his childhood home. Pratt's legal ordeal was not over, however. Garcetti appealed, saying he had found no evidence pointing to Pratt's innocence. He did not drop the case until an appeals court sided with Pratt in February 1999. The following year, Pratt won $4.5 million in a false-imprisonment lawsuit against the city of L.A. and the FBI. He bought a farmhouse in Imbaseni, Tanzania, where he enjoyed the companionship of Pete O'Neal, a former Black Panther who had fled the U.S. in 1970. O'Neal found him dead at home in May 2011. Pratt had been hospitalized with high blood pressure, a condition that had plagued him for years, but had torn out his IVs and gone home. He hated confinement. He was 63. "We always say, 'The system works,' but no, the system only produced the right result because Geronimo and the community and a band of lawyers fought the system. The system doesn't work by itself,' said Mark Rosenbaum, one of the lawyers who helped with Pratt's appeal. "They took away half of his life. And they couldn't break him.' So, who killed Caroline Olsen? Hanlon believes the killers were other Black Panthers — a pair of heroin addicts known to feed their habit with armed robbery. They died violently in the 1970s, one by gunfire, the other impaled on a fence during a burglary. In a recent interview, Garcetti, one of the defense team's primary antagonists for years, said that his views on the case have evolved. In retrospect, he regrets fighting to keep it alive. "He was more likely framed than he was the person who actually committed the crime,' Garcetti said. Since leaving office, he said, he has learned more about the U.S. government's tactics against disfavored groups in the 1960s and '70s. 'I have read enough to know the FBI, from the top down, were working to isolate any quote-unquote leader in the Black Panther movement, and it wouldn't shock me to learn that they went after people who really hadn't committed a crime that they were bent on removing from the scene." Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
