Dataset Information

Youth and Adult Arrests for Cannabis Possession After Decriminalization and Legalization of Cannabis.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Civil liberty advocates typically support legalization of cannabis, which targets adult use, rather than decriminalization, which can affect both adults and youths. However, it is unknown how arrests of youths for cannabis possession change when adult use of cannabis is legalized.

Objective

To model changes in arrest rates of adults and youths after decriminalization and legalization of cannabis.

Design, setting, and participants

This quasi-experimental study used the publicly available Uniform Crime Reporting Program Data: Arrests by Age, Sex, and Race administrative data set to examine arrest rates in 38 states from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2016. Adult (age, ≥18 years) and youth (age, <18 years) arrests for possession of cannabis were examined. States were excluded if they did not report complete arrest data or if a policy was implemented that reduced penalties for possession of cannabis but fell short of decriminalization. Fixed-effects regression was used in an extended difference-in-differences framework. The analyses in their final form were conducted between January 17 and February 28, 2019.

Exposure

Living in a state with a cannabis decriminalization policy (ie, making the penalty for cannabis possession similar to the small fine for a traffic violation) or legalization policy (ie, creating a legal supply of cannabis along with the removal of penalties for possession of a small amount of cannabis for recreational use).

Main outcome and measures

State cannabis possession arrest rate per 100 000 population.

Results

Data from 38 states were examined, including 4 states with cannabis legalization policies and 7 states with cannabis decriminalization policies. The adult arrest rate decreased by 131.28 (95% CI, 106.23-154.21) per 100 000 population after the implementation of decriminalization and 168.50 (95% CI, 158.64-229.65) per 100 000 population after the implementation of legalization. The arrest rate for youths decreased by 60 (95% CI, 42-75) per 100 000 population after decriminalization but did not significantly change after legalization in a state (7 per 100 000 population; 95% CI, -15 to 30).

Conclusions and relevance

Legalization, as implemented through 2016, did not appear to reduce arrests for cannabis possession among youths, despite having benefited adults. The study's findings suggest that decriminalization reduces youth arrests in most cases, but these findings also suggest that any benefit for youths could be lost when adult use has also been legalized. To address this problem, it appears that state decriminalization policies should take the additional step to explicitly describe when youths can be arrested for possession of small amounts of cannabis.

SUBMITTER: Plunk AD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6580444 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceDespite calls for cannabis decriminalization and legalization, research investigating the association of policy with arrest rates and racial disparities is scarce.ObjectivesTo examine racial differences in cannabis arrest rates among adults and youths after statewide decriminalization, legalization, and no policy changes.Design setting and participantsThis case-control study used race-based arrest data from the Uniform Crime Reporting Program and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results county-level population data from January 2000 through December 2019. Data were analyzed in July 2021. Event-study analyses based on the arrest rates from 43 US states were conducted to compare preimplementation and postimplementation differences in arrest rates for states with decriminalization, legalization, and no policy changes.ExposuresNine states implemented legalization, 8 implemented decriminalization, and 26 had no policy change.Main outcomes and measuresOutcome measures were cannabis arrest rates for Black and White adults and youths per year and by state, while controlling for several covariates.ResultsRates were reported per 100 000. When comparing absolute differences in arrests from January to December 2008 (before policy changes) to January to December 2019, legalization was associated with 561 and 195 fewer arrests and decriminalization with 448.6 and 117.1 fewer arrests for Black and White adults, respectively. States without a policy change saw reductions of 47.5 and 33.0 arrests for Black and White adults, respectively. Among youth, legalization was associated with 131.1 and 131.2 fewer arrests and decriminalization with 156.1 and 124.7 fewer arrests for Black and White youths, respectively. Among states without a policy change, arrests reduced by 35 and 52.4 for Black and White youths, respectively. Plotted trends of the arrest ratios from January 2000 through December 2019 suggests racial disparities remained over time. Event-study analyses suggest that decriminalization was associated with an arrest rate reduction for Black and White adults and youths. The timing of reductions suggests differential policy effects. Arrest disparities increased in states that did not have a cannabis policy change.Conclusions and relevanceIn this case-control study of states with and without cannabis decriminalization and legalization policies, increased arrest rate disparities in states without either policy highlight the need for targeted interventions to address racial injustice.

Project description:Background and aimsMany countries have recently legalized medicinal and recreational cannabis. With increasing use and access come the potential for harms. We aimed to examine the effect of cannabis legalization/decriminalization on acute poisoning.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022323437). We searched Embase, Medline, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to March 2022. No restrictions on language, age or geography were applied. Abstracts from three main clinical toxicology conferences were hand-searched. Included studies had to report on poisonings before and after changes in cannabis legislation, including legalization and decriminalization of medicinal and recreational cannabis. Where possible, relative risk (RR) of poisoning after legalization (versus before) was calculated and pooled. Risk of bias was assessed with ROBINS-I.ResultsOf the 1065 articles retrieved, 30 met inclusion criteria (including 10 conference abstracts). Studies used data from the United States, Canada and Thailand. Studies examined legalization of medicinal cannabis (n = 14) and decriminalization or legalization of recreational cannabis (n = 21). Common data sources included poisons centre records (n = 18) and hospital presentations/admissions (n = 15, individual studies could report multiple intervention types and multiple data sources). Most studies (n = 19) investigated paediatric poisoning. Most (n = 24) reported an increase in poisonings; however, the magnitude varied greatly. Twenty studies were included in quantitative analysis, with RRs ranging from 0.81 to 29.00. Our pooled estimate indicated an increase in poisoning after legalization [RR = 3.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.43-5.20], which was greater in studies that focused on paediatric patients (RR = 4.31, 95% CI = 2.30-8.07).ConclusionsMost studies on the effect of medicinal or recreational cannabis legalization/decriminalization on acute poisoning reported a rise in cannabis poisoning after legalization/decriminalization. Most evidence is from US legalization, despite legalization and decriminalization in many countries.

Project description:Background: Among youth already using cannabis, legalization of medical cannabis may influence cannabis-related attitudes and behaviors, including increasing access through use of someone else's medical cannabis (diversion). Objective: To examine cannabis-related attitudes and behaviors (including diverted cannabis use) in cannabis-using youth in the four years following medical cannabis legalization. Additionally, we investigated characteristics of youth who used vs. did not use diverted medical cannabis. Methods: Data were collected in Boston from 2013 (when medical cannabis legislation took effect in Massachusetts) through 2016 (when recreational cannabis use became legal in Massachusetts). Cannabis-using youth (age 13-24) presenting to an outpatient adolescent substance use treatment program (ASUTP) or recruited for an adolescent medicine clinic study (AMCS) completed a confidential survey on demographic characteristics and cannabis use behaviors and attitudes. We used multiple logistic regression to analyze changes in attitudes and behaviors over three years versus the reference year (2013), controlling for demographics. We used chi-square to compare characteristics of youth reporting use of diverted medical cannabis versus those not. Results: The sample included 273 cannabis-using youth (ASUTP n = 203, AMCS n = 70; 2013 n = 67, 2014 n = 67, 2015 n = 77, 2016 n = 62). Mean ± SD age was 18.2 ± 2.5 years, 32% were female, 58% were White non-Hispanic, and 70% had college-graduate parents. In 2013, most youth reported that cannabis was easy to obtain (97.9%), and that occasional cannabis use had "no" or "slight" risk of harm (89.4%), with little change across years. In 2016, 44% of youth reported using someone else's medical cannabis, versus 15% in 2013 (aOR 4.66, 95% CI 1.81, 11.95). Youth using diverted medical cannabis had higher likelihood of reporting riding with a driver, or driving themselves, after cannabis use (both p < .01). Conclusion: Among at-risk youth in Massachusetts, use of diverted medical cannabis increased after medical cannabis legalization, and those using diverted medical cannabis reported higher risk for cannabis-related traffic injury.

Project description:ObjectiveOver the past decade, cannabis use has become increasingly popular in states that include Colorado. During this time, alcohol use disorders (AUDs) and alcohol-related medical conditions have also been consistently recognized as public health problems with increasing prevalence in the state. Despite the widespread use of cannabis in Colorado, the epidemiology of cannabis use among those with AUDs has been poorly described. Therefore, we sought to examine cannabis use among individuals with likely AUDs and individuals with low-risk alcohol use during a time of major Colorado legislative changes before and after legalization of recreational cannabis in 2012.MethodsThis study was a secondary data analysis conducted with information from 303 participants (80% male) in the Denver, CO metropolitan enrolled between August 2007 and April 2016 for studies related to alcohol and lung health. Of these participants, 188 (62%) were completing inpatient alcohol detoxification with likely AUDs. All participants completed the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT) to establish their likelihood of an AUD, and all had information on current cannabis use assessed by questionnaire and urine toxicology testing.ResultsIndividuals with likely AUDs more commonly used cannabis compared to control participants (42% vs 27%, p = 0.007). In multiple logistic regression analyses, participant type (likely AUD versus control), tobacco smoking, and age were significantly associated with cannabis smoking; however, the year of participant enrollment was not. Adjusted odds for cannabis use among participants with likely AUDs were 2.97 (1.51-5.82), p = 0.002, while odds for cannabis use among tobacco smokers were 3.67 (1.94-6.93), p < 0.0001. Among control participants, tobacco smoking increased odds of cannabis use seven-fold.ConclusionsOur findings highlight the exceptionally high odds of cannabis use among individuals with likely AUDs undergoing alcohol detoxification at a Colorado treatment facility before and after legalization of recreational cannabis. Targeted investigations into the medical and psychiatric consequences of combined alcohol and cannabis use are urgently needed to define its health impact in these vulnerable individuals.

Project description:ImportanceThe impact of nonmedical cannabis legalization on traffic injuries and cannabis involvement in traffic injuries is unclear.ObjectiveTo examine changes in the number and characteristics of cannabis-involved traffic injury emergency department (ED) visits from before to after legalization and subsequent commercialization (ie, increased retail store and product availability) of cannabis in Ontario, Canada.Design, setting, and participantsThis repeated cross-sectional study examined changes in cannabis- and alcohol-involved traffic injury ED visits in Ontario, Canada, during 3 time periods: prelegalization (January 2010-September 2018), legalization with product and retail store restrictions (October 2018-February 2020), and commercialization with new products and expanded number of stores, which coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020-December 2021). All individuals aged 16 years and older eligible for Ontario's Universal Health Coverage were included. Season- and time-adjusted quasi-Poisson models were used to generate rate ratios with 95% CIs. Data were analyzed from March to April 2023.Main outcomes and measuresQuarterly counts of cannabis-involved ED visits for traffic injury.ResultsThere were 947 604 traffic injury ED visits, of which 426 (0.04%) had documented cannabis involvement and 7564 (0.8%) had documented alcohol involvement. Of the 418 individuals with documented cannabis involvement, 330 (78.9%) were male, 109 (25.6%) were aged 16 to 21 years (mean [SD] age at visit, 30.6 [12.0] years), and 113 (27.0%) had an ED visit or hospitalization for substance use in the 2 years before their traffic injury ED visit. Annual rates of cannabis-involved traffic injury ED visits increased 475.3% over the study period (0.18 visits per 1000 total motor vehicle collisions in 2010 to 1.01 in 2021). Over the same period, alcohol-involved traffic injury ED visits increased by 9.4% (8.03 in 2010 to 8.79 per 1000 traffic injury ED visits in 2021). Legalization with restrictions was associated with a 94% increase in the quarterly rate of cannabis involvement in traffic injury ED visits relative to prelegalization (adjusted rate ratio [aRR], 1.94; 95% CI, 1.37-2.75). Commercialization/COVID-19 was associated with a greater increase of 223% in rates (aRR, 3.23; 95% CI, 2.42-4.33). After adjusting for time trends before legalization, only commercialization/COVID-19 was associated with increased rates. Male sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.38; 95% CI, 2.66-4.29), living in the lowest-income neighborhood (aOR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.39-2.67), being aged 19 to 21 years (aOR, 4.67; 95% CI, 3.27-6.67), and having a prior cannabis-related ED visit (aOR, 8.03; 95% CI, 5.85-11.02) were all positively associated with cannabis involvement during a traffic injury ED visit.Conclusions and relevanceThis cross-sectional study found large increases in cannabis involvement in ED visits for traffic injury over time, which may have accelerated following nonmedical cannabis commercialization. Although the frequency of visits was rare, they may reflect broader changes in cannabis-impaired driving. Greater prevention efforts, including targeted education and policy measures, in regions with legal cannabis are indicated.