Polson Michael
City University of New York, Graduate Center, National Development and Research Institutes, Inc (NDRI), 4841 Cedar Ave, Philadelphia, PA 19143.
Territ Politic Gov. 2015;3(4):387-406. doi: 10.1080/21622671.2015.1073613. Epub 2015 Aug 21.
As governments worldwide justify the transformation of marijuana governance from one police power (law enforcement) to others (e.g. public health, zoning), the place of marijuana in lawful society is transforming rapidly. No venue in California is more central to this than land use regulatory bodies, which decide how marijuana rights, practices, and relations become territorial. Land use powers, as a declaration of the state's police power, require a definitional rendering of "community." This article analyzes an episode of outdoor marijuana cultivation policymaking and the struggles over the definition of community in a conservative exurban California county. From debates on fences, property line setbacks, rental terms, and nuisance complaints to racial and economic anxieties and the roaming stigma of crime, marijuana advocates confronted a powerful logic of private property and the moral-aesthetic propriety it implies. Despite the subordination of advocates' claims to the terms of private property, outlaw communities sustained their own forms of territorial governance, informal regulatory and enforcement powers, and understandings of community. This episode, which illuminates territorial production across illegal/legal lines, has implications for understandings of liberal rule of law, political possibility, and the practice of citizenship.
随着世界各国政府为大麻治理从一种警察权力（执法）向其他权力（如公共卫生、分区规划）的转变进行辩护，大麻在合法社会中的地位正在迅速改变。在加利福尼亚州，没有哪个场所比土地使用监管机构在这一转变中更核心，因为这些机构决定了大麻权利、活动及关系如何在地域上得以体现。土地使用权力作为该州警察权力的一种宣示，需要对“社区”进行定义性阐释。本文分析了加利福尼亚州一个保守的远郊县户外大麻种植政策制定的一段经历，以及围绕社区定义的斗争。从关于围栏、房产边界退缩、租赁条款和妨害投诉的争论，到种族和经济焦虑以及犯罪的游荡污名，大麻倡导者面临着私有财产的强大逻辑及其所蕴含的道德美学正当性。尽管倡导者的主张服从于私有财产的条件，但非法社区维持了它们自己的地域治理形式、非正式监管和执法权力以及对社区的理解。这一事件揭示了跨越非法/合法界限的地域生产，对理解自由法治、政治可能性和公民实践具有启示意义。
