5 ms·

Why do you think this? He was engaged in what was legal on a local basis. Where is the risk to his security clearance? Blackmail is out since the behavior wa

Why do you think this? He was engaged in what was legal on a local basis. Where is the risk to his security clearance? Blackmail is out since the behavior was clearly public. Do his two puffs on a joint indicate some sort of allegiance to a foreign power? Does the violation of any federal law or regulation disqualify someone from holding a security clearance?

count 7y ago
Yes, the violation of federal law general disqualifies you from holding a security clearance.
- londons_explore 7y ago
  Is weed against federal law?
  - leesalminen 7y ago
    Yes, yes it is.
    - londons_explore 7y ago
      How can something be against federal law yet still allowed in some states? I thought federal law applied across the whole USA?
      - fargle 7y ago
        I personally don't agree with the interpretation that drug control is a federal jurisdiction, but that is the status quo. Your second statement is true: Federal law DOES apply across all states. State law does not nullify or override this. There was a damn big bloody war over that question. Allowed does not mean legal. That's why it is still illegal, but unenforced, in several states. A state CANNOT legalize a controlled substance. To trust lax federal enforcement + state "legalization" is not a wise move. But practical. And besides, security clearances come from the Feds not the states, so who's laws do you think they go by?
- Dylan16807 7y ago
  But not if you don't get charged and can't be blackmailed over it.
mandevil 7y ago
I have held several security clearances of varying levels over the years. During interviews for every single one, I was asked about past drug use, in particular drug use within the past 7 years. (Note that they also ask about all psych/therapy stuff- though family, grief and combat related PTSD counseling are off-limits.) Some of those interviews took place in locations where marijuana was legal at the state level, but it is everywhere in the US illegal at the federal level so they ask. And while it wouldn't necessarily kill your clearance, recent use was definitely a black mark that would need to be analyzed and discussed with you and slow things down. Funniest moment in all my clearances: you need to provide a neighbor to be interviewed, having just moved and not knowing anyone well I picked the only neighbor I knew the full name of; turns out he was a registered sex-offender! Didn't kill my clearance, but did slow everything down and mean I got to spend a lot more time talking to men in suits than my colleagues did. Sounds similar to what is happening here, honestly.
- hef19898 7y ago
  That! Also, a history of alcohol abuse can be an issue. At least over here.
  - mandevil 7y ago
    Also true. They definitely asked me how much I drank per week.
    - hef19898 7y ago
      Yeah, my wife was close to filling for divorce when she had to sign and provide all her residential history. Not being German that history was quite long. And yeah, alcohol was also a thing. The most annoying so was social networks. At least it gave me the motivation to get rid of some accounts. And that is before you see how relevant data is handled in real life and you are left scratching your head in some cases...
Rebelgecko 7y ago
>Why do you think this? Because when you get a security clearance the feds explicitly ask if you've smoked weed in the last 7 years, and are especially interested in knowing if you've smoked weed while possessing a clearance (https://www.opm.gov/forms/pdf_fill/sf86.pdf https://www.opm.gov/forms/pdf_fill/sf86.pdf).
scott00 7y ago
Despite being legal under local law in a number of states, possession of even small quantities of marijuana remains illegal under federal law[0]. In the words of the National Security Adjudicative Guidelines[1]: "The illegal use of controlled substances... can raise questions about an individual's reliability and trustworthiness, both because such behavior may lead to physical or psychological impairment and because it raises questions about a person's ability or willingness to comply with laws, rules, and regulations." Whether or not you agree with the policy, it's still the policy, and if it's enforced when non-famous people with security clearances use drugs (it is), it should be enforced when famous people with security clearances use drugs. [0] 21 USC § 844: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/21/844 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/21/844 [1] the official policy defining the criteria by which security clearances are granted: https://fas.org/sgp/othergov/intel/sead-4.pdf https://fas.org/sgp/othergov/intel/sead-4.pdf
topspin 7y ago
> He was engaged in what was legal on a local basis. Local jurisdictions don't grant security clearances on behalf of the federal government, FYI. Cannabis is a Schedule I drug and illegal to use for any purpose outside FDA approved research programs according to existing Federal law. > Does the violation of any federal law or regulation disqualify someone from holding a security clearance? If you did it they'd pull your clearance. This isn't speculation. It happens to little folk all the time[1]. As cynical as it might seem the parent isn't wrong in pointing out the obvious disparity in treatment of wealthy and influential people vs plebs. Musk has the contacts and the lawyers to commit a federal crime on video and keep all of his privileges in this life, and you don't. I can't fault anyone for concluding this sort of double standard is a great dysfunction. [1] https://www.fedsmith.com/2019/05/30/revoked-security-clearance-leads-indefinite-suspension/ https://www.fedsmith.com/2019/05/30/revoked-security-clearan...

count 7y ago

Yes, the violation of federal law general disqualifies you from holding a security clearance.

londons_explore 7y ago
Is weed against federal law?
- leesalminen 7y ago
  Yes, yes it is.
  - londons_explore 7y ago
    How can something be against federal law yet still allowed in some states? I thought federal law applied across the whole USA?
    - fargle 7y ago
      I personally don't agree with the interpretation that drug control is a federal jurisdiction, but that is the status quo. Your second statement is true: Federal law DOES apply across all states. State law does not nullify or override this. There was a damn big bloody war over that question. Allowed does not mean legal. That's why it is still illegal, but unenforced, in several states. A state CANNOT legalize a controlled substance. To trust lax federal enforcement + state "legalization" is not a wise move. But practical. And besides, security clearances come from the Feds not the states, so who's laws do you think they go by?
Dylan16807 7y ago
But not if you don't get charged and can't be blackmailed over it.

mandevil 7y ago

I have held several security clearances of varying levels over the years. During interviews for every single one, I was asked about past drug use, in particular drug use within the past 7 years. (Note that they also ask about all psych/therapy stuff- though family, grief and combat related PTSD counseling are off-limits.) Some of those interviews took place in locations where marijuana was legal at the state level, but it is everywhere in the US illegal at the federal level so they ask. And while it wouldn't necessarily kill your clearance, recent use was definitely a black mark that would need to be analyzed and discussed with you and slow things down. Funniest moment in all my clearances: you need to provide a neighbor to be interviewed, having just moved and not knowing anyone well I picked the only neighbor I knew the full name of; turns out he was a registered sex-offender! Didn't kill my clearance, but did slow everything down and mean I got to spend a lot more time talking to men in suits than my colleagues did. Sounds similar to what is happening here, honestly.

hef19898 7y ago
That! Also, a history of alcohol abuse can be an issue. At least over here.
- mandevil 7y ago
  Also true. They definitely asked me how much I drank per week.
  - hef19898 7y ago
    Yeah, my wife was close to filling for divorce when she had to sign and provide all her residential history. Not being German that history was quite long. And yeah, alcohol was also a thing. The most annoying so was social networks. At least it gave me the motivation to get rid of some accounts. And that is before you see how relevant data is handled in real life and you are left scratching your head in some cases...

Rebelgecko 7y ago

>Why do you think this? Because when you get a security clearance the feds explicitly ask if you've smoked weed in the last 7 years, and are especially interested in knowing if you've smoked weed while possessing a clearance (https://www.opm.gov/forms/pdf_fill/sf86.pdf https://www.opm.gov/forms/pdf_fill/sf86.pdf).

scott00 7y ago

Despite being legal under local law in a number of states, possession of even small quantities of marijuana remains illegal under federal law[0]. In the words of the National Security Adjudicative Guidelines[1]: "The illegal use of controlled substances... can raise questions about an individual's reliability and trustworthiness, both because such behavior may lead to physical or psychological impairment and because it raises questions about a person's ability or willingness to comply with laws, rules, and regulations." Whether or not you agree with the policy, it's still the policy, and if it's enforced when non-famous people with security clearances use drugs (it is), it should be enforced when famous people with security clearances use drugs. [0] 21 USC § 844: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/21/844 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/21/844 [1] the official policy defining the criteria by which security clearances are granted: https://fas.org/sgp/othergov/intel/sead-4.pdf https://fas.org/sgp/othergov/intel/sead-4.pdf

topspin 7y ago

> He was engaged in what was legal on a local basis. Local jurisdictions don't grant security clearances on behalf of the federal government, FYI. Cannabis is a Schedule I drug and illegal to use for any purpose outside FDA approved research programs according to existing Federal law. > Does the violation of any federal law or regulation disqualify someone from holding a security clearance? If you did it they'd pull your clearance. This isn't speculation. It happens to little folk all the time[1]. As cynical as it might seem the parent isn't wrong in pointing out the obvious disparity in treatment of wealthy and influential people vs plebs. Musk has the contacts and the lawyers to commit a federal crime on video and keep all of his privileges in this life, and you don't. I can't fault anyone for concluding this sort of double standard is a great dysfunction. [1] https://www.fedsmith.com/2019/05/30/revoked-security-clearance-leads-indefinite-suspension/ https://www.fedsmith.com/2019/05/30/revoked-security-clearan...