In a fascinating development, according to this story, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit has held that a prisoner's claim that he cannot be incarcerated due to the Rohrbacher-Blumenauer Amendment may go forward. The argument being presented by the moving party appears to be an interesting and creative one. As the article notes, there is little case-law addressing the scope, reach, and effect of this amendment. As such, this is a case worth paying attention to and following closely.
Sandusky was convicted of drug trafficking and conspiracy charges in 2012 after federal agents raided his Upland, California, medical marijuana dispensary, G3 Holistic Inc. Two years later, Congress passed the Rohrabacher-Farr amendment, a rider on a spending bill that cinches the purse strings shut for enforcement of federal marijuana laws in medical cannabis states. Sandusky claims his operation was compliant with California medical marijuana laws, which have been on the books since 1996. The Federal Bureau of Prisons therefore runs afoul of Congress’ mandate with each cent it spends confining him, Sandusky's argument goes. ... Sandusky’s case is distinct because he has already been convicted and imprisoned for several years, unlike the 10 appellants in McIntosh who sought dismissal of pending cases. No court has handed down precedent on how the rider applies to existing convictions, the majority noted.