You are such a Bogart, Dom. Seriously, thank you for the hand YOU played in making this a new reality.

I'll raise you this, but only because I can't find a good clip of the bacchanal. Congrats.

For sure, nothing more important happened today. Great work, Dom!

This could only possibly matter if people at the federal level decide they no longer care about drug enforcement. Unlike other state conflicts with federal law - i.e., marriage - there's no easy path until the federal government moves marijuana out of Schedule I. Otherwise, this is at best a pipe dream and at worst a pitfall where well-meaning citizens get busted for federal crimes. The status quo relies on non-binding federal commitments to not prosecute medical marijuana; there aren't even any "commitments" regarding enforcement of fully legalized marijuana. No thanks - I demand that our state representation engage in further talks with federal representatives to work this out. What are their plans?

@3

Personally, I rate marriage equality higher than legal marijuana. Both are nice, but one is also a fundamental human right.

@5

Thanks, that was my point. Yay Dom!

Congratulations, Strangers! You're on the winning side and the right side, too.

@7,

That just isn't enough. Dominic Holden is counting on YOU, America's soldiers, to solve this most important crisis of our times. Just how will he get high tomorrow? Will it be legal? Will he remember if it is, either way?

We need to answer these questions, or he may not remember to do so. The burden is on you and me!

Dom - from medical marijuana through I-75 to 502...thank you, thank you, thank you.

Two down, 48 (plus DC and the colonies) to go...and then the UN. It is a whole new world.

And thank you for all you've done.

I'm going to get some sleep, but before I do - I need to thank the crack reporting team of the Stranger News Department for their in-depth coverage embedded here on SLOG. You're the best!

Dear Feds: We know there are only 200 of you in our state.

(grin)

Hey how many 16 year old medicinal users have been arrested at traffic stops so far? Can we have a daily tally?

@10: Hmm. I sense the butthurt is strong with this one...

@13: If they're driving around stoned, they deserve it. If they're not stoned but merely chronic users, they won't have enough THC in their blood to set off the 5 nanograms per milliliter. But please, by all means, keep with the fearmongering.

@16, I think @13 was being facetious. I'm pretty sure his point was that none, so far, and really, it's not likely that any will be under the new law.

The federal government has been sent a message: Stop the war on the American people!

High fives and jealousy from a former Washington resident.

But I think the question on everyone's mind is: how does Lisa Dank feel about this?

perhaps i should try some of this marijuana now. are there stores in which one may legally purchase this product?

@21 depends.

What's the password?

Washington is decidedly NOT the first state to legalize marijuana. Do some research. Or, in the alternative, surf over to Wikipedia.

In Alaska, cannabis was decidedly legal (under state, but not federal, law) for in-home, personal use under the Ravin v. State ruling of 1975. This ruling allowed up to two ounces (57 g) of cannabis and cultivation of fewer than 25 plants for these purposes. A 1991 voter ballot initiative recriminalized marijuana possession, but when that law was eventually challenged in 2004, the Alaska courts upheld the Ravin ruling, saying the popular vote could not trump the state constitution. In response to former Governor Frank Murkowski's successive attempt to re-criminalize cannabis, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit against the state. On July 17, 2006, Superior Court Judge Patricia Collins awarded the Case Summary judgment to the ACLU. In her ruling, she said "No specific argument has been advanced in this case that possession of more than 1 ounce (28 g) of cannabis, even within the privacy of the home, is constitutionally protected conduct under Ravin or that any plaintiff or ACLU of Alaska member actually possesses more than 1 ounce (28 g) of cannabis in their homes." This does not mean that the legal possession threshold has been reduced to one ounce, as this was a mere case summary review filed by the ACLU, not a full case. Reinforcing Ravin, Collins wrote "A lower court cannot reverse the State Supreme Court's 1975 decision in Ravin v. State" and "Unless and until the Supreme Court directs otherwise, Ravin is the law in this state and this court is duty bound to follow that law". The law regarding possession of cannabis has not changed in Alaska, and the Supreme Court has declined to review the case, therefore the law still stands at 4 ounces (113 g). However, federal prosecutions under the CSA can be brought in Federal Court, and federal courts applying federal law are not bound by state court precedent. As such, federal courts in Alaska will recognize that possession of any quantity of marijuana remains illegal in Alaska under federal law.

I don't care about weed. Legalize psychedelics!