Many states now have laws allowing medical use of marijuana. New Mexico's law, passed a few months ago, has a new twist. It is the first law that requires the state to produce its own pot.

The law, effective Sunday, not only protects medical marijuana users from prosecution _ as 11 other states do _ but requires New Mexico to oversee a production and distribution system for the drug.

"The long-term goal is that the patients will have a safe, secure supply that doesn't mean drug dealers, that doesn't mean growing their own," said Reena Szczepanski, director of Drug Policy Alliance New Mexico.

The state Department of Health must issue rules by Oct. 1 for the licensing of marijuana producers and in-state, secured facilities, and for developing a distribution system.

The other states with medical marijuana laws:

Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington. Maryland's law doesn't protect patients from arrest, but it keeps defendants out of jail if they can convince judges they needed marijuana for medical reasons.

J covered the startling SCOTUS reversal on granting cert in the DC Gitmo detainee cases earlier and here, Orin Kerr predicts reversal:

What's remarkable about this isn't that the Supreme Court agreed to hear them, but how: the Court denied cert at first back in April, with several Justices writing opinions in the cert denial, and then granted a petition for rehearing. This is extremely unusual, and it is probably a pretty good sign that a reversal is likely.

As I argued earlier this year, Kerr believes Boumediene is in conflict (Kerr uses the professorial description of "tension") with Rasul:

Lowell Feld writes up Senator Jim Webb's blogger conference call today:

Sen. Webb started off by talking about how he shared the "disappointment" of many regarding "the way the appropriations supplemental was handled by our party." He had hoped that his amendment, which would require that soldiers can't be redeployed unless they've been home at least that long, would have been attached to the supplemental. That would have cut right to the "inviolable bottom line" regarding how our troops are being used. The logic on that was "unassailable and clear," so if the President had vetoed it, everyone would have understood what he was doing. . . .

I think the questions to be asked about this statement are obvious. Feld reports the following questions:

How close did Karl Rove come to getting indicted in PlameGate? As they say, "this close." Check out today's re-issued opinion (pdf) in the Judith Miller - Matthew Cooper D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals subpoena case containing new un-redactions: the name of Karl Rove.

Now unredacted:

"Regarding Cooper, the special counsel has demonstrated that his testimony is essential to charging decisions regarding White House adviser Karl Rove."

Then on page 39:

"Thus, given the compelling showing of need and exhaustion, plus the sharply tilted balance between harm and news value, the special counsel may overcome the reporters’ qualified privilege, even if his only purpose—at least at this stage of his investigation—is to shore up perjury charges against leading suspects such as Libby and Rove."

The unredaction there is the last two words: "and Rove."

There's more goodies, including those about Armitage, Libby and Cheney. The pdf is searchable, type in your favorite name. The unredactions are in italics.

[Hat tip to TL reader and diarist Scribe.]

Here's a little song you can all join in on....

Everyone knows that blog traffic goes down substantially for political blogs on weekends. It declines more so on holiday weekends, like the one beginning today with the 4th of July just around the corner.

So, please, give the gift of traffic. It's free. All you have to do is visit your favorite blogs so they register your presence.

Just about every blog has a blogroll. Check out some of the blogs on them. If you're online and blogging, try to link more this weekend.

I'll start, and I'll be updating and occasionally bumping this post over the next few days.

• The Talking Dog has an interview with Gaillard Hunt, counsel for Pakistani National Saifullah Paracha, currently at Guantanamo Bay, where he may become our first non-suicide death if his heart problems continue to go untreated.

• Avedon Carol at Sideshow on the failure of the immigration bill.

• Law Prof Doug Berman at Sentencing Law and Policy evaluates the Supreme Court's term from a sentencing perspective.

• For humor, visit TBogg and Wonkette and Jesus' General (who today rips Tom Tancredo on immigration.)

• The crew at Firedoglake has several great posts scheduled for the weekend. Start with For Life, For Jane.

More...

Scotus Blog reports that in a change not seen since 1968, the Supreme Court has reversed course in two Guantanamo cases. Months ago it denied the detainees' Petitions for Writ of Certiorari, refusing to accept their cases.

Today, by a ruling of at least 5 to 4, which is required for such a change, the Court reversed itself and said it will hear the appeals.

The Court's order is reprinted below:

E.J. Dionne, in a "closing the barn door after the horse has gotten out" column, argues that the Senate should:

Just say no. The Senate's Democratic majority -- joined by all Republicans who purport to be moderate -- must tell President Bush that this will be their answer to any controversial nominee to the Supreme Court or the appellate courts. The Senate should refuse even to hold hearings on Bush's next Supreme Court choice, should a vacancy occur, unless the president reaches agreement with the Senate majority on a mutually acceptable list of nominees.

With all due respect to Dionne, that is a fine sentiment and I agree with it, but it does not undo the damage done. When "idiot liberals" like me were urging filibusters of Roberts, and especially, Sam Alito (who unlike Roberts, was not a stealth candidate, anyone who wanted to could see what he would do), we were told to be "realistic" and that Democrats needed to "keep their powder dry." Indeed, the entire fight over the "nuclear option" was made a bad joke by the capitulation of Senate Democrats on Alito.

TRex nails the she-pundit at Firedoglake while Digby holds court with another edition of Digby Speaks, You Listen.

"Feminizing" male Democrats and "masculinizing" female Democrats is pretty much all she does.

This isn't brain surgery. Faggots, smelly fat women, it's right out of the adolescent lizard brain, and sadly it works on a certain type of voter --- probably more than we would be comfortable knowing about. Coulter is an extreme version of a conservative archetype whose entire worldview is shaped by primitive notions of male dominance.

If you'd rather watch the latest segment of the discombobulated she-pundit, she comes undone in full glory yesterday morning during Joe Scarborough's MSNBC radio show.

More...

The Supreme Court today set aside the death penalty of a delusional inmate.

In a rebuke to lower courts, the justices ruled 5 to 4 that the defendant, Scott Louis Panetti, had not been shown to have sufficient understanding of why he was to be put to death for gunning down his wife’s parents in 1992.

The court, acting on the last day of the 2006-7 term, declined to lay out a new standard for competency in capital cases. But it found that existing protections had not been afforded.

The decision is significant, particularly for Texas. In a press release today, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) wrote:

More...

Most political junkies are watching the Democratic debate. Me, I'm watching the NBA draft.

My early reviews as to who is having a good night? Portland got Oden. Traded Zack Randolph to the Knicks for Steve Francis and Channing Frye (other players involved). Since I think Oden will be the modern day Russell, Portland can do no wrong tonight.

As far as who did the most with what they had, I like the Hawks draft, Al Horford and Acie Law are very good value for 3 and 11 though I think Horford went too high and Law went too low. The headscratcher for me, from BOTH ENDS, is the Celtics-Sonics trade, 32 year old Ray Allen for the 5, and that pick is Jeff Green? Worst pick of the draft imo. Green was not a top 15 player in this draft. He disappeared at the end of games.

Most of you don't give a hoot about any of this, but don't worry, it is an Open Thread.

Via Atrios:

Joe Klein on 6/18/06:

In fact, the responsible path is the Democrats' only politically plausible choice: they will have to give yet another new Iraqi government one last shot to succeed. This time, U.S. military sources say, the measure of success is simple: Operation Forward Together, the massive joint military effort launched last week to finally try to secure Baghdad, has to work. If Baghdad isn't stabilized, the war is lost. "I know it's the cliche of the war," an Army counterinsurgency specialist told me last week. "But we'll know in the next six months—and this time, it'll be the last next six months we get."

Joe Klein, over two Friedmans later [today]:

It is, indeed, a moment of truth in Iraq. "This is a decisive phase," a member of Petraeus' staff told me and began to laugh. "That's one of our favorite jokes. It's always a decisive phase. But this time, I guess you'd have to say, it actually is." Operation Phantom Thunder, the nationwide offensive launched by U.S. and Iraqi troops in mid-June, may well be the last major U.S-led offensive of the war. "We couldn't really call it what it is, Operation Last Chance," says a senior military official. There is widespread awareness among the military and diplomatic players in Baghdad that, with patience dwindling in Washington, they have only until September — when Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker are due to give Congress a progress report — to show significant gains in taming the jihadist insurgency and in arresting the country's descent into civil war.

One of the more interesting things to happen politically this year is the manner in which the Beltway Establishment has basically been utterly rejected by most of the country. While David Broder bleats for "sensible bipartisanship" without ever explaining what substantive policies should actually look like, the American People have basically rejected the performance of the Washington Establishment.

For Democrats in Washington, their performance on Iraq has pushed their approval ratings to extreme lows. For Republicans, it has been Bush's immigration bill.

One thing is clear about this year, the big loser has been the Washington Elite. NOBODY likes them. They have never been as out of step with the country as they are now. I wonder if they have any clue about this.