For decades, both Democrats and Republicans have skirted around marijuana reform, but only one party has stood firmly for full legalization since day one: the Libertarian Party.
Founded in 1971, the Libertarian Party emerged in direct contrast to President Nixon’s newly declared War on Drugs. Its first platform, adopted a year later, called for the legalization of all drugs—a radical stance for its time.
Under the crime plank, it states: “We favor the repeal of all laws creating ‘crimes without victims,’ such as laws on voluntary sexual relations, drug use, gambling, and attempts to commit suicide.”
In 1972, the Libertarian Party chose its first presidential and vice presidential candidates, John Hospers and Tonie Nathan. Hospers was a philosophy professor at the University of Southern California. His book, Libertarianism: A Political Philosophy for Tomorrow, served as a campaign book, a treatise on the libertarian philosophy, and the foundation for the libertarian movement. Nathan was a talk show host and business owner, and was the first woman to receive an electoral vote.
The New York Times coverage of the 1972 presidential campaign listed the legalization of marijuana as part of their platform, while other candidates did not.
This was unique at the time because neither of the major parties supported the legalization of marijuana. Richard Nixon continued to oppose marijuana legalization despite the Shafer Commission’s finding that marijuana was not dangerous. The Democratic Candidate George McGovern supported decriminalization, but not the legalization of marijuana.
While other candidates disregarded the issue, the Libertarian Party’s stance on cannabis never wavered. More than 50 years later, it remains one of the few political parties to have maintained that same commitment to individual freedom and legalization.
Libertarians strongly believe that it is up to the individual to decide what is best for themselves as long as they don’t hurt others or violate their rights. The government has no right to dictate what individuals can or cannot consume.
For example, if you choose to smoke marijuana as a way to unwind in the comfort of your own home, you are free to do so. On the other hand, if you decided to smoke a joint, then drive under the influence, and hit someone, that would be unacceptable. Not only are you harming someone, but you are also interfering with their right to live.
Advocacy Through the Decades
Across five decades, Libertarian candidates and activists have remained remarkably consistent in their calls for cannabis reform. While other parties perpetuated the War on Drugs, Libertarians continued to link legalization to their core belief in personal freedom and limited government.
The 1980s—Keeping Cannabis on the Libertarian Platform
In 1980, when Ronald Reagan claimed marijuana was “possibly the most dangerous drug in the United States,” Libertarian presidential candidate Ed Clark strongly campaigned for its decriminalization in addition to abolishing the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
A 1980 press release written by the Clark campaign found that the DEA spent more than $800 million a year on drug prohibition. It also cited that local police spent half of their time enforcing laws against marijuana use.
Marijuana laws also became stricter at the federal level. The Reagan administration implemented two laws related to drug use and mandatory minimum sentencing. The Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 increased federal penalties for growing, possessing, or selling marijuana. It also gave the government more power to seize assets connected to criminal activities such as drug trafficking.
The 1984 Libertarian candidate for President, David Bergland, discussed the ineffectiveness of drug laws in the first edition of his book Libertarianism in One Lesson. Bergland pointed out that drug laws that crack down on crime do not work because they do not consider supply and demand. Making a drug illegal doesn’t mean it’s unattainable, just more expensive. It also doesn’t stop consumers from getting what they want, no matter the cost.
This was followed by the 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act, which established mandatory minimum sentences for drug-related offenses. It also added a three-strikes amendment, which gave life sentences to repeat drug offenders.
Three years later, at the 1989 Libertarian Party Convention in Philadelphia, Steve Dillon, former candidate for Governor of Indiana and former director of Indiana NORML, discussed solving the drug problem by implementing three reforms. First, to decriminalize marijuana and all controlled substances for personal use. Second, to hold people accountable who commit crimes or cause accidents under the influence. Third, to repeal laws and regulations that repeal the establishment of private drug rehabilitation programs.
The 1990s—Medical Marijuana and the Push for Compassionate Reform
In the 1990s, the legalization of marijuana movement was focused on medical use. Libertarian writer and activist Steve Kubby was diagnosed with a rare form of adrenal gland cancer, and after doing research, he decided to use cannabis to help relieve his symptoms.
In 1996, he co-authored Proposition 215 with prominent Medical Marijuana activists Dennis Peron and Mary Jane Rathbun. This made California the first state to legalize marijuana for medical use. Despite this advancement for compassionate use, the battle for legalizing medical marijuana was far from over.
Another Libertarian activist and author, Peter McWilliams, wanted to take things a step further and legalize medical marijuana nationally. In 1996, he was diagnosed with both AIDS and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma; as a result, he was prescribed 15 different medications. Due to his cancer diagnosis, he suffered from nausea and was unable to keep down his pills. He decided to use cannabis to relieve both nausea and pain.
In 1998, he was arrested for growing marijuana at his home in Bel Air, California, because medical marijuana was still illegal at the federal level. These plants were not only for Peter’s personal use, but also to supply medical marijuana cooperatives. McWilliams was accused of being a drug dealer, even though he argued that California legalized medical marijuana two years earlier; he pleaded guilty. To be released on bail, he had to stop smoking marijuana. Peter’s symptoms returned, and he died as a result of choking on his vomit. Peter died a hero who gave his life in the name of medical freedom without government interference.
2000s to 2010s—Candidates Bring Cannabis to the National Stage
In the early 2000’s while more states such as Colorado and Nevada legalized medical marijuana, it remained illegal at the federal level. Harry Browne was nominated to run for president on the Libertarian ticket a second time.
Browne’s platform heavily focused on drug reforms. He said:
“On my first day in office, I will pardon everyone who has been convicted of a non-violent federal drug offense,” Browne said. “I will empty the federal prisons of the marijuana smokers, and make room for the truly violent criminals who are terrorizing our citizens.”
In the 2000’s marijuana related arrests exceeded the number of arrests for violent crimes. This was the highest number of arrests recorded by the FBI; 88% of arrests were for marijuana possession.
In both his 2012 and 2016 campaigns, Gary Johnson made cannabis legalization a central campaign issue. While campaigning for President, Johnson was also the CEO of Cannabis Sativa Inc., a company that sold recreational marijuana products. Johnson also believed in legalizing recreational marijuana because it would lead to less substance abuse and be safer than alcohol. He also thought it was counterproductive to continue to arrest thousands of Americans every year over a plant that should be legal.
The Modern Era—From Advocacy to Federal Legalization Efforts
In the 2020s, Libertarians continued to speak in favor of complete federal legalization of marijuana and the expungement of nonviolent marijuana offenders. In 2020, the Jo Jorgensen and Spike Cohen Presidential ticket released a campaign ad called Victimless calling to end the War on Drugs.
The ad shows a variety of clips of politicians who were in favor of the War on Drugs. Jo Jorgensen spoke out against the Democratic Party’s attempt to keep Tulsi Gabbard from the debate stage because she called out Kamala Harris for putting thousands of people in jail for marijuana possession and laughed when she was asked if she smoked marijuana.
Donald Trump, much like his Republican predecessors, took a tough-on-crime approach when it came to drugs, and even the death penalty was an option. This simply continues the War on Drugs; it doesn’t eliminate illegal drugs. Trump’s recent update on rescheduling marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III is no different. It doesn’t guarantee that marijuana will be legalized at the federal level for medical or recreational use. It does, however, prove that the federal government has been exaggerating about the dangers of marijuana.
Jorgensen said, “I will federally decriminalize all drugs, letting consensual adult activities become safer and destigmatized, allowing the true victims to be recognized so they can be given the help they need.”
Jorgensen points out that the War on Drugs persists precisely because prohibition keeps substances outside regulatory systems. Legalization replaces secrecy with oversight, allowing cannabis to be cultivated and consumed within frameworks designed to reduce harm rather than amplify it.
The Libertarian Party and the Future of Cannabis Freedom
The Libertarian Party’s consistent advocacy for marijuana legalization isn’t just a lengthy historical narrative; it’s an important lesson about perseverance. For over 50 years, they have promoted a message that was once controversial, taboo, and eventually accepted by more people.
Consistent and principled messaging is important because, unlike the duopoly, their stance on marijuana hasn’t changed because of donors, lobbyists, or changing public opinion. Libertarians may not have earned enough electoral votes to legalize marijuana at the federal level, but it didn’t stop them from contributing to the conversation through press releases, activism, and working together with marijuana advocacy groups like NORML.
This also leaves us with something more to think about: what has been done and what can be done to continue to drive meaningful policy change on marijuana legalization. Good ideas don’t require force, just consistent and principled messaging. The road to federal marijuana legalization may be difficult, but it isn’t impossible.
This article is from an external, unpaid contributor. It does not represent High Times’ reporting and has not been edited for content or accuracy.
