The Trump administration announced that it will enforce federal laws barring the use of marijuana, reversing an Obama administration policy that gave wide latitude to states to determine their own pot laws. Eight states – Washington, Oregon, California, Nevada, Alaska, Colorado, Massachusetts, and Maine – and Washington, D.C. have legalized both medicinal and recreational marijuana. The Obama administration had opted not to enforce federal prohibitions in states that had passed legislation legalizing the drug. It’s classified as a Schedule 1 drug — putting it in the same category as heroin — and the government can restrict cross-state shipment and financing as a result.
White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said the Trump administration would prioritize enforcement in states that have passed laws allowing for the recreational—rather than medical—use of the drug. Just a day after the announcement, publicly traded shares of marijuana-related companies were tumbling and executives at recreational marijuana businesses were expressing their disappointment in the announcement.
The announcement was not a surprise to legalization advocates after Trump’s nomination of Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions as attorney general. Many advocates feel that Mr. Sessions has been “the single biggest opponent to legalization in the US Senate.”
In August 2013, a four-page directive issued by then-Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole essentially instructs that a hands-off approach be taken by the federal government in states that have voted on laws to legalize marijuana, regardless of the fact that marijuana is illegal at the federal level. The directive has been dubbed the “Cole Memo”.
President Trump has issued differing stances on marijuana legalization. In the 1990s, Trump told the Miami Herald that the US needed to “legalize drugs to win” the war on drugs. And in an interview with Fox News’s Bill O’Reilly a year ago, Trump said he was in favor of medical marijuana “a hundred percent” while also calling Colorado’s recreational marijuana industry “a real problem.”
The industry is still new and is estimated to be worth over $6 billion so the reversal will cost some states millions in revenue and a loss of jobs. Recreational marijuana retailers in Oregon sell about $7 million worth of cannabis every week, or about $364 million a year.
In 2016, the marijuana industry in Colorado created more than 18,000 new full-time jobs and over $1 billion in retail sales. The industry also generated over $1 billion in additional economic activity such as growers renting warehouse space and the purchases of sophisticating lighting and irrigation equipment. Marijuana retailers also boost the economy when they rely on other companies, like contractors, lawyers and bookkeeping services, to conduct their own businesses. If the Trump Administration’s promise of a crackdown does take effect- all of this new found revenue will be lost.
Read more
Many are outraged after a viral video showed an off-duty LAPD officer firing a gun near a group of kids after the officer grabbed a 13-year-old boy by his hoodie and restraining him. The incident took place near the officer’s home in Anaheim, California.
The cellphone video shows a man in plainclothes holding a boy against his will. The boy repeatedly says, “Let me go” but the man refuses. The man, who never identifies himself as an officer is surrounded by other children as he pulls the boy down the street over lawns. Eventually, the other kids come to the aid of the boy, pushing the officer over a row of hedges. The man, who still has hold of the boy is then seen drawing a pistol from his waistband before a gunshot rings out. No one was injured in the incident.
According to one of the youths, the group was walking home from school when the incident took place. The 13 year old says it quickly escalated and turned physical when the man tackled him and choked him. While the video does not show what happened prior, it starts with the boy being restrained and asking to be let go. He then says “why are you grabbing me, I just said not to talk to a girl like that! You called her a dumb c**t.” The man replies that she shouldn’t have been on his lawn.
Anaheim police say the officer had an ongoing dispute against children who were walking on his lawn. Both the 13-year-old boy and his 15-year-old brother were arrested. The off-duty officer, who has not been identified, was questioned by Anaheim police and released.
Overnight, around 300 protesters gathered near the officer’s home, before marching through Anaheim’s streets and blocking intersections. Some protesters shouted “hands up, don’t shoot” and “no justice, no peace.” Some demonstrators threw rocks and kicked police cars, while others broke windows or residences and cars, according to the LA Times.
There was also a small group of protestors who lingered around the officer’s home chanting “Don’t shoot the children.” The officer’s home and vehicle were vandalized before riot police arrived to protect the officer’s home. Twenty-four people were arrested on misdemeanor charges of failure to disperse.
The LAPD says the officer is on paid administrative leave while the department evaluates if his “use of deadly force complied with LAPD’s policies and procedures.” Anaheim police say they are reviewing other videos of the altercation to get a clearer picture of what happened.
Anaheim mayor Tom Tait and Police Chief Raul Quezada both said they were thankful no one was wounded when the officer fired a handgun into the ground. They also both said they are disturbed by video that shows an off-duty Los Angeles police officer firing his gun during a confrontation with a teenager.
Police Chief Quezada told reporters “As a father and as a police chief, I too am disturbed by what I saw on the videos that were posted on the Internet,” He said he hopes a criminal investigation into the matter, which involved several teens and an off-duty Los Angeles police officer who lives in Anaheim, will be completed within two weeks. No one has been formally charged in the incident.
Read more
President Trump signed legislation to repeal a Dodd-Frank anti-corruption measure requiring oil and mining companies to disclose payments to governments. The rule had required public oil, gas and mineral extraction companies to disclose annually its payments to both foreign governments and the U.S. government.
According to lawmakers, these disclosures help fight corruption in resource-rich countries. The requirement was the Cardin-Lugar Anti-Corruption Provision of 2010’s Dodd-Frank Act – signed by former President Barack Obama and named for former Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., and Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md. The regulation was widely support from Democrats, who argued the transparency requirement could reduce instances of corruption in resource-rich countries overseas.
The goal of the rule is to prevent foreign leaders from skimming off the payments that drillers and miners make to their countries. It was put in place to stop the corruption that enriches the politically connected but deprives regular people of their country’s mineral wealth.
The oil industry had fiercely lobbied against the measure. The resource extraction rule has been controversial since it was mandated in 2010, which is why it took six years for it to be finalized. Exxon, Chevron (CXW) and the National Mining Association were among the dozens of entities to submit comments opposing the rule.
Longtime ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson, who is now secretary of state, personally lobbied against the rule, flying to Washington, D.C., to meet with then-Senator Richard Lugar in 2010 to try to get the measure removed from Dodd-Frank. The American Petroleum Institute, the chief U.S. energy lobbying organization”s main argument against the rule was that it puts U.S. companies at a disadvantage, because their foreign competitors are not subject to the requirements.
However, many major European drillers like BP, Total and Royal Dutch Shell, Russian oil and gas giants Rosneft and Gazprom, as well as Canadian firms must report what they pay to foreign governments. The U.S. rules would have forced some Chinese and Brazilian firms to do so as well.
House Speaker Paul Ryan said in a statement that the provision in question “would have put American oil and natural gas companies at a disadvantage on the world stage, and actually could have threatened the safety of American workers abroad.”
Lawmakers used the Congressional Review Act, a seldom-used legislative route that essentially fast-tracks the regulatory repeal process. By accessing the provisions laid out, it allows lawmakers to expedite a resolution that requires little notice before introduction and is not subject to filibuster. It also requires only a simple majority of 51 votes in the Senate to pass.
Read more
On February 9th, a federal appeals court in San Francisco unanimously upheld a suspension of President Trump’s executive order barring all refugees from entering the U.S. and restricting travel from seven Muslim-majority countries. In the unanimous decision, a three-judge panel on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled courts have the authority to review constitutional challenges to executive actions.
Last week, U.S. District Judge James Robart in Seattle issued a temporary restraining order halting the ban after Washington state and Minnesota sued. The ban temporarily suspended the nation’s refugee program. After the ban was put on hold, the State Department quickly said people from the seven countries — Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen — with valid visas could travel to the U.S. The decision led to tearful reunions at airports around the country.
Justice Department lawyers appealed to the 9th Circuit, arguing that the president has the constitutional power to restrict entry to the United States and that the courts cannot second-guess his determination that such a step was needed to prevent terrorism.
The panel declined to block a lower-court ruling that suspended the ban and allowed previously barred travelers to enter the U.S. The judges rejected the administration’s argument that courts did not have the authority to review the president’s immigration and national security decisions. They also said the administration failed to show that the order met constitutional requirements to provide notice or a hearing before restricting travel and presented no evidence that any foreigner from the seven countries cited by the travel ban had committed terrorism in the U.S.
This controversial court battle has just begun. Now, the lower court must debate the merits of the ban, and an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court seems likely. When that happens, it could put the decision in the hands of a divided court that has a vacancy. A potential 4-4 tie would leave the appeals court’s ruling in place.
The appeals court only sided with the administration on one issue: the argument that the lower court’s temporary restraining order could not be appealed. While under 9th Circuit precedent such orders are not typically reviewable, the panel ruled that due to the intense public interest at stake and the uncertainty of how long it would take to obtain a further ruling from the lower court, it was appropriate to consider the federal government’s appeal.
Trump’s nominee, Neil Gorsuch, could not be confirmed in time to take part in any consideration of the ban. President Trump responded to the ruling on Twitter, tweeting “SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!” The ban was set to expire in 90 days, meaning it could run its course before the Supreme Court would review the issue.
Read more
President Trump has imposed a controversial 90-day ban on travelers from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. On January 27th, Trump signed the order banning travel from the seven Muslim-majority countries for 90 days and suspending all refugee admission for 120 days. Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) leadership saw the final details shortly before the order was finalized.
The result was widespread confusion across the country on Saturday as airports struggled to adjust to the new directives. Stories of families separated or detained for hours starting circulating news outlets.The policy team at the White House developed the executive order on refugees and visas and avoided the traditional inter-agency process that allowed the Justice Department and homeland security agencies to provide operational guidance.
DHS arrived at the legal interpretation that the executive order restrictions did not apply to people with lawful permanent residence, referred to as green card holders. The White House overruled that guidance overnight and decided that on a case by case basis, DHS could allow green card holders to enter the US. The Department of Homeland Security decided that green card holders would be allowed to board international flights but would be considered on a case-by-case basis after passing a secondary screening.
Acting Attorney General Sally Yates announced the Justice Department would not defend Trump’s executive order temporarily banning all refugees, as well as all citizens, from the seven Muslim-majority nations. Just hours after her announcement, President Trump fired her. Yates had served in the Justice Department for 27 years and Trump had asked her to serve as acting attorney general until the Senate confirmed Sen. Jeff Sessions.
Yates is not the only one to publicly disagree with the executive order. More than 200 State Department officials and diplomats have signed on to drafts of a dissent memo that condemns Trump’s executive order. Executives at a growing number of corporations have spoken out against Trump’s immigration ban, including Google, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook, Netflix, Tesla, Airbnb, Ford and Goldman Sachs. World-wide protests has erupted across the globe as well.
Then, Federal Judge James Robart, who presides in Seattle, halted the enforcement of Trump’s order Friday night, effective nationwide. Ruling in a lawsuit brought by the attorneys general of Washington state and Minnesota who sought to stop the order, he said the states “have met their burden of demonstrating that they face immediate and irreparable injury as a result of the signing and implementation of the Executive Order. ” He said the order adversely affects residents in areas of education, employment, education and freedom to travel.
The Department of Homeland Security announced it has suspended all actions to implement the immigration order and will resume standard inspections of travelers as it did prior to the signing of the travel ban. They said the Justice Department — which is expected to file an emergency motion to stop the order — needed to challenge the ruling “at the earliest possible time.”
Read more
In an effort to broaden the company’s “social interaction” with our clients and FaceBook fans, Daily Trivia Questions are posted on both of our business pages. Here are the weekly standings for this past week, and the winner of the Sunday night Weekly Drawing for an AmEx gift card!
Congratulations – To this past week’s Trivia Contest Winner!! Our latest contest winner for the weekly FaceBook HealthInsurance4Everyone/Health & Life Solutions, LLC Trivia Contest, drawn randomly by computer late Sunday evening, February 5th, 2017 was:
JENNIFER KINNER
Boyne Falls, MI
Winner Of A $25.00 AmEx Gift Card
Each day, fans of either of our company FaceBook pages (HealthInsurance4Everyone or Health & Life Solutions LLC) are able to test their skills with our Daily TRIVIA QUESTION. The first 20 winners who post the correct answer to the TRIVIA QUESTION, will then get entered into the weekly drawing held late on Sunday evenings for a $25.00 Am Ex Gift. Card
Weekly Gift Card winners will be posted in our blog at this site. Remember to become a FaceBook “fan” on either of our company pages to enter and post your answers.
Here are the daily contestants from last week’s Trivia Contest that were entered into the Sunday drawing:
1/30/17
Brittany Deaver
Carol Scheive
Dawn Raasch
Sherri Kidwell
Ashley Stamey Phillips
Karen Hacker Lewis
Mary Ann Cody
Holly Cajigas
Lisa Puckett
Melissa Barnes Walker
Erica Hansen
Kristin Yergey
Amy Marie Wilkinson
Alexandria Tinnon
Melissa Turner Baker
Tammy Alcorta
Jennie Gallagher
Adaria Johnson
Mya Murphy
Pamela White Brearley
Tabitha Sinks
Sandy Nevels
Jennifer Kinner
Cheryl Hall
1/31/17
Kendra George
Paula Rivers
Mary Achio
Alexandra Vindiola
Christine Acoba
Brittany Deaver
Raquel Munoz Navarro
Darrell Skarvan
Heather Jacques
Megan Akins
Brandi Chaney
Jennifer Kinner
Susanne Killion
Sheila Carvell
Lotorya Patrick
Paula M Bondy
Sheila Carvell
Terri Llexxes
Juanita Williams-Jones
Thomas Ryan
2/1/17
Kendra George
Cheryl Hall
Jakara Jackson
Kassi Krick-King
Michelle Hughes
Priscilla Shimp
Anna Ashley Pinder
Mary Achio
Dawn Raasch
Dana Marie Germain
Leslie Wagner Hobson
Ashley Agner
Thomas Ryan
Kristina Harris
Crystal Young
Sheila Carvell
Brenda Casey
Kizzy Alvarez DeSantis
Samantha Brwn Ramos
Cheyenne Shaw
Jade Good
Kathleen Hickman
2/2/17
Michelle Hughes
Jennifer Saavedra
Anna Nichols
Glenna Zanaglio
Preeti Chand
Melissa Turner Baker
Paula Rousseau
Heather Marie Stacy
Kendra George
Kimberly Snyder
Christy Hawkes
Darbie Brown
Melissa Ann Stura-Bassett
Wayne Gallas
Dena Baji
Kayla Clemons
Misty Shallcross
Kimberly Taylor Hall
Angel Anderson
Phyllis Hines
2/3/17
Mya Murphy
Preeti Chand
Annette French
Beth Cleveland
Trish Hysell
Sarah Bellestri Shih
Kayla Hernandez
Alisa Jones
Adaria Johnson
Raquel Munoz Navarro
Wizdom Norwood-Goins
Christine Acoba
Mary Alice Ford
Lezlie Earley
Kizzy Alvarez DeSantis
Jennifer Sparks
Chrissy Kim
Carla S-Paige Williams
Terri Llexxes
Angela Nicole
2/4/17
Crystal Young
Kayla Clemons
Ashley Oshier
Angelique Drummond
Mya Murphy
Kimberly Taylor Hall
Paula Rousseau
Megan Akins
Stephanie Beckwith
Lotorya Patrick
Kristina Harris
Jennifer Downing
Kimberly Foster
Beth Cleveland
Nitasha Shank
Amy Chavis
Georgiann D’Angelo
Mary Achio
Lisa Wright
Brandy Marie Williams
2/5/17
Misty Shallcross
Sheila Carvell
Ashley Stamey Phillips
Mary Achio
Jennifer Ramlet
Christy Hawkes
Joanie Waterman
Ashley Agner
Jade Good
Tiffany Greene Elliott
Melissa Ann Stura-Bassett
Brandi Chaney
Becca Dotsun
Kimberly Foster
Brandy Marie Williams
Jennifer Downing
Crystal Young
Brenda Casey
Tina Marie
Andrea Timms
Be sure to watch both of our FaceBook pages for your chance to win and enter again next week, with questions posted daily on HealthInsurance4Everyone or at Health & Life Solutions, LLC!!
Remember that if you try your hand at answering the Trivia Question several days each week, your odds of winning the Sunday weekly drawing are much better. You may also find that if you “Like” both of the business pages, you will receive faster notifications of the other players as they post their answers to compete with you!
—————————————————————-
At Health Insurance 4 Everyone, we not only want to improve our customer service but also interact with our customers on a social media level that wasn’t available before. Interested in connecting with us? Look us up on….
Twitter: Healthinsurane4 (Follow Us On Twitter To Receive Faster Notifications When Daily Trivia Questions Posted, & To Be Immediately Notified When Weekly AmEX & HI4Eshop Gift Card Winners Are Announced!!)
Click-On for LinkedIn To Follow Our Posts: LinkedIn
Follow Mark Shuster, Founder/Owner at Health & Life Solutions, LLC for daily health tips!
Mark Shuster FaceBook Link
Follow our word press blog and read about everything from health insurance and reform news to healthy living and current events!
Company Blogs
Find out more about LegalShield, our corporate partner which gives you the power to talk to an attorney about any legal issue, and offering high-quality Identity Theft plans.
LegalShield
Read more
New York City taxpayers will pay $75 million to settle a class action lawsuit against the New York Police Department over its issuing of nearly 1 million legally baseless criminal summonses over several years because they were under pressure to meet quotas. The summonses were later dismissed for lack of evidence. The settlement must be approved by U.S. District Judge Robert W. Sweet.
The suit was filed in a federal court in 2010 on behalf of people who were hit with 900,000 court summonses that were later dismissed because of legal deficiencies. The settlement would allow people issued court summonses for offenses such as trespassing, disorderly conduct and urinating in public to receive a maximum of $150 per person per incident for their trouble.
The lawsuit argued police were routinely ordered to issue summonses “regardless of whether any crime or violation” had occurred to meet quotas. It cited claims by two whistleblower officers who said they were forced into quotas by precinct superiors. The quota allegations were denied in the settlement agreement.
Under the agreement, the city said the NYPD must update and expand training and guidance reiterating to officers and their superiors that quotas are not allowed, and officers must not be mandated to make a particular number of summonses, street stops or arrests.
A total of $56.6 million would be set aside, and individual payments could end up lower if more claims are made. Any funds not paid go back to the city, which is also paying $18.5 million in legal fees. Possible class members would be notified through social media and other advertisements.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs called it the largest false-arrest class-action lawsuit in city history. The 2010 lawsuit includes summonses filed from 2007 through at least 2015. About one-quarter of the summonses issued during that time frame were dismissed for legal insufficiency, according to data in the lawsuit. Legal insufficiency is not necessarily a lack of evidence but may be that an officer wasn’t clear enough in explaining why someone was ticketed.
The class action suit came amid a growing outcry over the NYPD’s encounters with minorities. The lead plaintiff in the case, Sharif Stinson, said he was stopped twice outside his aunt’s Bronx building in 2010 when he was 19 and was given disorderly conduct summonses by officers who said he used obscene language. The officers didn’t specify what the language or behavior was, and the tickets were dismissed.
Read more
Lawmakers quietly closed the investigation into the lead poisoning of the water system in Flint, Michigan in December 2016. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee’s findings blamed state officials, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) and the EPA.
The Flint water crisis began when the city’s unelected emergency manager, appointed by Michigan Governor Rick Snyder, switched the source of Flint’s drinking water from the Detroit system to the corrosive Flint River to save money. The water corroded Flint’s aging pipes, causing poisonous levels of lead to leach into the drinking water. The impoverished city was under state control at the time.
Between 6,000 and 12,000 children were been exposed to drinking water with high levels of lead and they may experience a range of serious health problems.
The chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Jason Chaffetz, issued two separate letters announcing that the investigation was finished and that Snyder was without guilt because it was the Environmental Protection Agency’s fault Flint’s water source was shifted to a contaminated source. After the April 25, 2014 switch to Flint River water from back-up to temporary primary source, city residents began complaining about their water’s color, taste, and odor.
Thirteen people have been charged in the Flint Water Crisis and its cover-up. Former MDEQ employees Michael Prysby and Stephen Busch were charged with misconduct in office, conspiracy to tamper with evidence, tampering with evidence, a treatment violation of the Michigan Safe Drinking Water Act, and a monitoring violation of the Safe Drinking Water Act. Former city water plant operator Michael Glasgow was charged with willful neglect of office, a misdemeanor, and felony tampering with evidence. Glasgow accepted a plea deal with prosecutors, admitting to filing false information about lead in Flint water and agreeing to cooperate in other prosecutions.
Liane Shekter-Smith was charged with misconduct in office and willful neglect of duty; Adam Rosenthal was charged with misconduct in office, conspiracy to tamper with evidence, tampering with evidence, and neglect; Adam Cook was charged with misconduct in office, conspiracy to engage in misconduct in office, and neglect of duty. From the MDHHS, Nancy Peeler, Corinne Miller, and Robert Scott were charged with misconduct in office, conspiracy to commit misconduct in office, and willful neglect of duty.
On December 20, 2016, false pretenses, conspiracy to commit false pretenses, willful neglect of duty and misconduct in office charges against former Emergency Managers Darnell Earley and Jerry Ambrose; and false pretenses and conspiracy to commit false pretenses charges were filed against former Flint Utilities Administrator Daugherty Johnson and former Flint Department of Public Works director Howard Croft. Many residents are outraged that Governor Rick Snyder has survived the investigation unscathed since some of the officials charged reported directly to him.
The closing of the investigation came as Flint Mayor Karen Weaver told residents they should still not drink the water. The city’s lead pipes have not yet been replaced.
Read more
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has decided to drop a series of lawsuits to buy plots of lands in Hawaii after public backlash. Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan purchased the 700-acre waterfront estate on Kauai for $100 million in 2014. They filed a series of eight lawsuits to buy out several hundred people’s stake of 13 plots on eight acres partitioned during the 1850s.
Many of the plots of land involved in the suits are “kuleana lands” which were granted to native Hawaiian tenant farmers between 1850 and 1855 and hold special rights including access, agricultural uses, gathering, water and fishing rights.
The suit was met with heavy criticism by some Hawaiians including hundreds who planned to protest outside Zuckerberg’s estate. The suits would have forced hundreds of residents, including Native families, off their land in order to make his Hawaiian beachfront property as private as possible.
He initially defended the move, saying the purpose of the quiet title action was to identify property owners who were unaware of their stake in the land. “Quiet title actions are the standard and prescribed process to identify all potential co-owners, determine ownership, and ensure that, if there are other co-owners, each receives appropriate value for their ownership share,” Zuckerberg’s lawyer, Keoni Schultz, said earlier in January.
Zuckerberg published a letter in the local Hawaiian newspaper The Garden Island saying it was clear the decision to file the suits over his ownership of the beachfront property on the island of Kauai was a mistake. Zuckerberg said he initially misunderstood the quiet title process and hoped to work with the community to find a better solution.
“To find a better path forward, we are dropping our quiet title actions and will work together with the community on a new approach,” he said. “We understand that for native Hawaiians, kuleana are sacred and the quiet title process can be difficult. We want to make this right, talk with the community, and find a better approach.”
“Upon reflection, I regret that I did not take the time to fully understand the quiet title process and its history before we moved ahead. Now that I understand the issues better, it’s clear we made a mistake,” he said. “The right path is to sit down and discuss how to best move forward. We will continue to speak with community leaders that represent different groups, including native Hawaiians and environmentalists, to find the best path.”
In June 2016, Zuckerberg faced criticism for building a 6 foot stone wall enclosing his 700 acre property. Many residents said it blocked breezes and obstructed ocean views. Others argued that while it is his right to build on his property-it did not feel very neighborly.
Read more
Mexican drug lord Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán pled not guilty in a U.S. federal court in New York City. His attorneys had fought his extradition in part by citing discrimination against Mexicans. His court appearance came just one day after his extradition from Mexico and he is being held without bail. Guzman, 59, arrived at Long Island’s MacArthur Airport Thursday night after being taken from prison in the city of Juarez, in the northern state of Chihuahua, where his Sinaloa cartel rules.
He is accused of running the world’s largest drug-trafficking organization. There are 17 criminal charges against him, carrying a minimum sentence of life behind bars. Guzman is accused of money laundering, drug trafficking, kidnapping and murder in several US cities, including Chicago, Miami and New York. Charged in a total of six U.S. jurisdictions, Guzman will faced his first set of charges in Brooklyn on a combined indictment from New York and Florida.
While leading the Sinaloa cartel, Guzman is believed to have been running the world’s largest transnational cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine smuggling operation. More than 100,000 people have been killed during a decade-long drug war in Mexico. A U.S. attorney says the government is seeking a $14 billion forfeiture order as part of its prosecution of the notorious Mexican drug kingpin.
According to his indictment and court filings, Guzman grew and sold poppies for heroin as a young boy. His drug trafficking career that began in the 1980s and he came to dominate Mexican smugglers by the speed with which he was able to move drugs into the United States.
After partnering with Colombian producers, they shared in profits of U.S. distribution markets, moving cocaine and other drugs through tunnels under the U.S. border as well as planes, yachts and even a submarine, employing a crew of violent hit men known as“sicarios” and corrupting Mexican officials.
The indictment charges Guzman with running the massive drug trafficking operation that laundered billions of dollars and oversaw murders and kidnappings. Prosecutors agreed to not seek the death penalty as a condition of the extradition of Guzman, who’s the convicted leader of the Sinaloa cartel.
Guzman had maintained control and expanded his drug trafficking empire through two prison terms in Mexico. He has escaped twice from a maximum security prison in Mexico, once in a laundry cart and a second time in 2015, through a mile-long tunnel dug into the shower in his cell. He was captured a year ago, just six months after his last escape. Mexican officials say a secret interview with US actor Sean Penn helped locate the world’s most wanted drug baron. US officials have refused to say where El Chapo will be held while awaiting trial, but they vowed to prevent any further escapes.
US attorney for New York’s Eastern District, Robert Capers, told reporters the trial will likely be long and that more than 40 witnesses were ready to testify. US prosecutors assured Mexican officials that El Chapo would not be executed in order to secure his extradition, Capers said. Mexico opposes capital punishment. “Guzman and the Sinaloa cartel had a veritable army, ready to war with competitors and anyone Guzman deemed to be a traitor,” US prosecutors said. He was known to carry a gold-plated AK-47 rifle.
Read more
