Scott Morgan thinks through the recent raids:

The big problem here seems to be that Montana's medical marijuana law doesn't explicitly authorize dispensaries. Claiming (as some have) that these businesses are perfectly legal under state law isn't exactly accurate, and thus DEA could argue that their actions are consistent with the Attorney General's pledge to intervene only when state laws are violated. ...

But let's get one thing straight: DEA intervention is unnecessary and intolerable regardless of whether or not violations of state law are taking place.

DEA is a federal agency and has no business interpreting local laws that they don't even have authority to enforce. States have all the tools they need to address violations of their own laws. It's absurd to even pretend as though DEA is merely assisting in that process, since questions surrounding state law are irrelevant in federal court either way. There exists no logical role for federal enforcement at any stage in the process, the potential for abuse is dramatic, and no recourse exists in the event that a lawful business is targeted erroneously.

The bottom line is that few, if any, among us really understand what constitutes a fair raid under the current federal guidelines.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.