Cuomo Says Senate Votes Aren't There to Legalize Marijuana for Recreational Use in NY
Gov. Andrew Cuomo was less than optimistic Tuesday that a newly amended bill to legalize marijuana in New York for adult, recreational use would pass this year, saying during a radio interview that the votes weren't there to approve the legislation in the State Senate.
May 28, 2019 at 01:12 PM
6 minute read
Gov. Andrew Cuomo expressed pessimism about the prospects for passage this year of a newly amended bill to legalize marijuana in New York for adult, recreational use, saying during a radio interview Tuesday that the votes weren't there to approve the legislation in the State Senate.
The comments from Cuomo—a supporter of wider legalization of marijuana—came after a coalition of defense attorney organizations publicly urged the Legislature to pass the new version of the bill, which would legalize the drug and allow low-level marijuana-related convictions to be expunged.
The bill, called the Marijuana Regulation and Taxation Act, was amended late May 24 by lawmakers who sponsor it to bring the measure closer in line with Cuomo's own proposal on marijuana legalization earlier this year.
They said they are hoping the new version wins the support of their colleagues, who have yet to coalesce around any of this year's proposals on the drug. Cuomo said the measure doesn't have enough support from Democrats in the State Senate to become law with less than four weeks left in this year's legislative session.
“The senators say on the record they don't have the votes to pass it politically, and I think that's the problem here, is the political reality that you don't have the votes in the Senate,” Cuomo said. “I support it. I proposed it. But we're getting down to the final three weeks or so and they're still saying they don't have the votes.”
Last week's amendment to the marijuana bill is a last-ditch effort by its sponsors to convince other lawmakers that marijuana legalization should happen this year. Assembly Majority Leader Crystal Peoples-Stokes, a Democrat from Buffalo who sponsors the bill, was confident last week that it could happen before they're scheduled to leave next month.
“I quite frankly think this is doable,” Peoples-Stokes said. “We have 20 days, we can get this done, and that's my plan.”
The new version reflects what was negotiated earlier in the year between Cuomo and state lawmakers before the legislation was dropped from the state budget. But there is one glaring difference between the two versions that's of particular interest to defense attorneys.
The newly amended bill is written to allow the expungement of low-level marijuana-related convictions, while Cuomo's proposal would have only permitted those records to be sealed. The former option essentially erases the record from ever existing, while the latter would allow those convictions to still be seen by certain members of law enforcement.
The Cuomo administration has previously told lawmakers that allowing expungement, rather than sealing, would require an amendment to the state constitution. That process can't be done immediately; it requires two votes by the Legislature and approval from voters. Alphonso David, Cuomo's counsel, has said legislation allowing expungement may not survive a legal challenge.
Cuomo in his radio appearance said he would still support the bill, even if it was written to include expungement, rather than his initial proposal to seal those records.
“I don't think this is the deal-breaker issue,” Cuomo said. “I don't think it's gonna be on the merits. I think it's on the politics.”
While it may not be the central conflict on the legislation between Cuomo and lawmakers, the expungement provision was a top reason the bill won support Tuesday from defense attorney groups. They said in a joint statement that the legislation would provide new opportunities for those who currently have a permanent stain on their criminal records.
The statement was issued jointly by the Legal Aid Society, New York County Defender Services, Brooklyn Defender Services, the Bronx Defenders, and Neighborhood Defender Service of Harlem.
“New York State's failed war on marijuana still ensnares thousands of our clients—nearly all of whom are black and Latinx—and other New Yorkers across the state each year, resulting in needless incarceration and a host of other devastating consequences,” the groups said. “The [bill] brings justice to New York State by ending prohibition, expunging conviction records that have curtailed the opportunities of countless predominately young black and Latinx New Yorkers.”
They also saw the legislation as another step in this year's reforms to the state's criminal justice system. Lawmakers previously approved major changes to the state's laws on cash bail, criminal discovery, and the right to a speedy trial. Legalizing marijuana and allowing low-level convictions to be erased would support those efforts, the groups said.
“Governor Cuomo and the Legislature enacted historic reforms to our bail, discovery, and speedy trial statutes earlier this year, and they must build on that success by enacting the MRTA into law this session,” they said.
Members of law enforcement, including the New York Sheriffs Association, previously came out against legalization this year, citing concerns over road safety. They asked lawmakers, at the time, to include funding for more personnel and training on drug recognition in the bill.
The new legislation, according to its text, would allow some grants to be made to state and local law enforcement agencies, though there's no designated amount.
Lawmakers return to Albany this week for the final four weeks of what's expected to be a marathon end of the legislation session. If Cuomo and lawmakers agree to legalize marijuana during that time, the measure would likely pass sometime during the last few days of this year's session, which is scheduled to end June 19.
READ MORE:
New Marijuana Legalization Bill Proposes Expungement of Records, Assembly Leader Says
NY Senate Leader Backs Expunging Criminal Records in Marijuana Legalization
Law Enforcement Opposed to Legal Marijuana Cite Road Safety Hazard
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRelaxing Penalties on Discovery Noncompliance Allows Criminal Cases to Get Decided on Merit
5 minute readBipartisan Lawmakers to Hochul Urge Greater Student Loan Forgiveness for Public-Interest Lawyers
'Playing the Clock'?: Hochul Says NY's Discovery Loophole Is to Blame for Wide Dismissal of Criminal Cases
So Who Won? Congestion Pricing Ruling Leaves Both Sides Claiming Victory, Attorneys Seeking Clarification
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Departing Attorneys Sue Their Former Law Firm
- 2Pa. High Court: Concrete Proof Not Needed to Weigh Grounds for Preliminary Injunction Order
- 3'Something Else Is Coming': DOGE Established, but With Limited Scope
- 4Polsinelli Picks Up Corporate Health Care Partner From Greenberg Traurig in LA
- 5Kirkland Lands in Phila., but Rate Pressure May Limit the High-Flying Firm's Growth Prospects
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250