When the Supreme Court finally declared the Civil Rights Act of 1875 unconstitutional, Frederick Douglass, amid an outpouring of outrage, advised that we must first take a collective deep breath.  

The Supreme Court had killed the law that guaranteed African Americans access to public accommodations and stopped barring them from serving on a jury on the grounds it didn’t control actions of individuals.

It appeared this reviled 1883 decision would grind African American progress to a halt.

“We may be better prepared to speak calmly and wisely than is possible now. We have been grievously wounded in the house of our friends, and the wound is too fresh, too deep, and too painful for the measured speech of ordinary occasions,” Douglass said at the time.

Taking a collective deep breath was good advice then and it is a good first step now.

In June, the Supreme Court ruled on behalf of Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) that the constitution doesn’t allow public or private higher education institutions to consider race as a part of the admission process because it violates the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

With that, more than 60 years of work to diversify schools and provide opportunities for minorities was undone.

The Supreme Court has a history of devastating decisions.  

• Cases like the 1857 Dred Scott v Sandford, where an African American slave sued for his freedom, and the court decided Blacks were not citizens. Chief Justice Roger Taney uttered his infamous racist line that African Americans, “had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” 
• And the 1896 Plessy v Ferguson case, which enshrined the country’s separate but equal doctrine, giving legal cover to the creation of the Jim Crow system until Brown v Board of Education in 1954 declared state-sanctioned school segregation unconstitutional.

In June, Chief Justice John Roberts’s majority opinion eradicating affirmative action referred to Brown when he said, “Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

• Roberts’s words eerily echoed Supreme Court Justice Joseph Bradly who in 1883 questioned whether the Civil Rights Act of 1875 was even necessary. “When a man has emerged from slavery … there must be some stage in the progress of his elevation when he takes the rank of a mere citizen and ceases to be the special favorite of the laws …”

For us this means the highest court in the land is too fickle to stake our survival on.

As early as 1830, Richard Allen, who founded African Methodist Episcopal Church (AME), the first independent Black denomination in the United States, presided over the First Convention of Free Persons of Color to debate whether the legal process could lead to racial justice.

Judge A. Leon Higginbotham, Jr., a prominent federal appeals court judge and legal scholar answered the same question in 1974 when he said, “we must make major efforts in other forums without exclusive reliance on the federal legal process.”

Each legal setback is a renewed call for action.

This most recent decision should encourage all of us to invest in the educational institutions we have built to overcome oppression. Research shows that historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) and not majority white institutions, created the African American middle class and are still the drivers of socioeconomic mobility for low-income African American students. Their mission has not changed.

This most recent decision should also remind us that African Americans have always had to fight for justice while surviving in the midst of injustice.  The Supreme Court didn’t kill our progress in 1883. It won’t destroy our progress in 2023.

About The Author

Chad Dion Lassiter, MSW, is a nationally recognized expert in race relations. He has worked on race, peace, and poverty-related issues in the United States, Africa, Canada, Haiti, Israel, and Norway, and is frequently featured in the media providing commentary and solutions to racial issues. Lassiter is currently executive director of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission, where he has legislatively delegated authority to investigate filed complaints alleging the occurrence of unlawful discrimination in the areas of employment, housing and commercial property, education, and/or regarding public accommodations.

Ecosocial Work: Environmental Practice and Advocacy by Rachel Forbes and Kelly Smith answers that call with chapters that include theoretical frameworks and innovative tools. In this comprehensive text, the authors take a justice-centered approach as they draw on case examples to elevate multicultural and intergenerational perspectives spanning from local to global contexts. The book encourages readers to consider how simultaneously protecting the planet while meeting the historical aims of the profession advances the values and ethical mandates social workers abide by. Designed to foster critical thinking, the book offers hope and possibility for a just environmental future.

Prior to 2020, the field of social work was limited in its adoption of digital practice. However, with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, traditional, in-person service delivery was dramatically interrupted. Previously at a crossroads, the field is now experiencing a seemingly unstoppable shift toward modern technology-mediated forms of delivery.

Social Work in an Online World: A Guide to Digital Practice by David A. Wilkerson and Liam O’Sullivan addresses this shift and charts the changing landscape from analog to digital practice in varied client systems, system needs, and system levels (micro, mezzo, and macro). Going beyond online mental health service, which is largely individually focused and synchronously delivered, the authors offer a map of digital social work practice that can be expanded to include support, identity, community action, education, and psychoeducation.

In Metaphor Analysis in Public Policy and Private Practice: A Social Work Perspective, Gerald V. O’Brien encourages the reader to educate, engage, and make the connection between individual work and policy. Focusing on the emotionally charged issues associated with social work, he shows the reader how metaphors are used to oversimplify complex issues like poverty, immigration, and mental health. He demonstrates how the overt and covert use of dehumanization, objectification, “positive” stereotyping, and fear- and disgust-based metaphors shape public opinion and policy and can damage an individual’s self-worth and perception.

It is essential for social workers and allies of social justice to understand public discourse metaphors if they are to advocate for and treat the vulnerable and oppressed populations that they serve. Engaging at this level helps social workers live up to the code of ethics of the profession, whether they work in public policy, institutions, or private practice.

43 Essential Policies for Human Services Professionals by Gerald V. O’Brien boils down key policies to their most essential elements: historical overview and nature of the social problem, policy overview, and effectiveness. Analysis elements address issues related to the policy, such as trigger events, problem framing, social engineering, covert rationales, unintended consequences, target efficiency, and governmental responsibility.

This thought-provoking and reader-friendly text prepares students for class engagement, lobbying activities, meeting with legislators, and serving their local communities. It fulfills the basic need of all social workers to understand the historical roots of oppression, to advocate for their clients’ access to services, and to advance social and economic justice.

____________________________________________

For more information about all NASW Press titles, including books, eBooks, reference works, journals, brochures, and standards, visit the NASW Press website. If you have questions, please send an email to NASWPress@BrightKey.net or call 1-800-227-3590.

The U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) on June 29 made a ruling on affirmative action that will have profound and long-term implications for the country.

With a 6-3 majority decision, SCOTUS declared in Students for Fair Admissions inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College that race-conscious admissions programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina violate the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection.

More directly, the ruling forbids all colleges and universities in the United States from taking race into consideration when admitting students.

Though the plaintiff in this case raised concerns about purported discrimination against Asian Americans, it would be a  mistake to focus solely on the ethnicity of the  litigant.

This case is about aggressive, fully formed, anti-affirmative action groups – mostly white conservatives –  that have been active in opposing this policy since President Lyndon Johnson signed Executive Order 11246 in 1965.

White women are main beneficiaries of Affirmative Action and more Black students could turn to HBCUs

We must be reminded that affirmative action policies do not exclusively target Black and Hispanic people. In addition to these groups, women are included as beneficiaries of diversity, equity, and inclusion programs.

In fact, white women have benefited from affirmative action  more than any other group. Therefore, the response to the SCOTUS action must include all the stakeholder communities that will be impacted.

As an aside, it is ironic that Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), which have made post-secondary education available to young Black men and women since 1837, will likely again be the primary option for academically talented Black student to obtain a quality college education.

This is because the Court’s decision means these young people will either be excluded from elite colleges such as Harvard, or simply choose not to apply for admission.

The outrage voiced by many in the civil rights community about the ruling’s impact on equal access to education is well justified. However, it is important that social justice leaders understand that the decision by SCOTUS will likely have consequences that reverberate throughout business and other public sectors well beyond Harvard and the University of North Carolina.

Court ruling could impact business community

Some have said the effects of the ruling on the nation’s business community could be profound.

Corporate America has been receptive to diversity, equity and inclusion policies.

However, the ruling will certainly incentivizes employees – and conservative activists – to bring legal challenges to such policies.

In addition, there is  further speculation the SCOTUS ruling could even trigger challenges to  disparate-impact laws that have been extremely effective in the fight against housing discrimination based on racial disparities.

What are next steps for social workers and other social justice activists?

In the face of the tremendous aftershock of the court’s affirmative action decision, the question is what are the next steps for civil rights and social justice activists – including social workers.

The following is from a statement from The Urban League, one of the country’s leading civil rights organizations:

“Together, we will fight relentlessly until every student has the equal opportunity to access higher education and pursue their dreams. Our country thrives when we nurture the talents and potential of students from all backgrounds and build respect for everyone. Despite this Supreme Court ruling, we remain resolute in our commitment to constructing equitable pathways to higher education and the opportunity that comes with it.”

While the statement expresses deep concern about the fate of affirmative action in education, it does not speak to the precarious nature of diversity, equity, and inclusion policies in sectors other than colleges and universities.

The magnitude of the Court’s ruling cannot be understated. However, protests and tweaking existing affirmative action programs will not address the deeper problem that rests with the Supreme Court’s conservative majority.

We only need to look at the fact that the  affirmative action decision on June 29 was quickly followed by several other civil rights and social equity rulings by the Court that were antithetical to diversity, equity, and inclusion values.

This includes a separate SCOTUS ruling that will open the door for more businesses to openly discriminate against people who are LGBTQIA2S+.

It is clear that the composition of the Supreme Court must change. The only way to make that change is through the ballot box.

Therefore, the priority next steps following SCOTUS’ ruling is for civil and human rights communities to become singularly focused on the 2024 elections.

Disclaimer: The National Association of Social Workers invites members to share their expertise and experiences through Member Voices. This blog was prepared by Mel Wilson in his personal capacity and does not necessarily reflect the view of the National Association of Social Workers.

Mel Wilson, LCSW, MBA, is a former senior policy advisor who continues to be active on a range social policy area including youth justice, immigration, criminal justice, and drug policy. He is a co-chairperson of the Justice Roundtable’s Drug Policy Reform Working Group.

Nearly 100 social workers from 44 states and two U.S. territories attended 143 meetings with Congressional offices in the U.S. House and Senate on June 28, 2023, to build bipartisan support for key federal legislation that will assist the social work workforce, our clients, and communities.

The Advocacy Day is part of the National Association of Social Workers (NASW) Association Leadership Meeting that is attended by social work leaders from across the country

“NASW’s Advocacy Day on Capitol Hill is an opportunity for social workers to share their knowledge, experience and expertise with Congressional lawmakers and their staff.  Our voices are critical as we try to advance policies that will expand access to mental and behavioral health services nationwide,” NASW Director of Public Policy Sarah Butts, MSW, said.

“Having social workers on Capitol Hill is crucial for the public policy work of NASW. Constituents matter in Congress. Social workers coming from across the country to advocate for our profession and our social justice priorities makes a real difference,” says Dina Kastner.

Participants were briefed about NASW’s priority legislation and greeted by NASW CEO Anthony Estreet, PhD, MBA, LCSW-C, who assumed his role on February 6.

“This is my first time as CEO of NASW to see the Advocacy Day in action. The work of our chapter leaders is essential in advancing NASW’s public policy priorities,” says Dr. Estreet.

“NASW Advocacy Day on Capitol Hill is a critical part of the work the NASW staff and leadership do on behalf of the members of NASW and the entire social work profession. In addition to having relationships with Congressional staff in the state districts, this day is an opportunity to meet with DC staff to advocate for higher reimbursement rates for clinical social workers,” says Valerie Arendt, MSW, MPP, executive director of the NASW North Carolina Chapter.

“NASW-NC Board President Rosalie Calarco and I were able to stop by and speak with 14 Congressional offices today. NASW membership matters as there is no other group advocating for all areas of our great profession.”

“At our NASW Capitol Hill Day, we found that every single legislative staff member, both Democrat and Republican, recognizes mental health and wellness as a priority issue.  We social workers need to develop relationships with our members of Congress to improve our ability to advocate for NASW’s legislative agenda, which will benefit our clients and our profession,” said Victor Manalo, PhD, MSW, president of the NASW California Chapter .

“We had three meetings with staff members of the Iowa congressional delegation. Iowa has a severe mental health professional workforce shortage, and all of the staff we spoke with seemed to understand the need to increase the number of and access to social workers for Iowans,” said Denise Rathman, MSW, executive director the NASW Iowa Chapter. 

“They were particularly aware of the importance of telehealth for clients and social workers. It was a great opportunity to build relationships with DC policy makers.”

Participants urged support on the following bills.

The Improving Access to Mental Health Act (S. 838/H.R. 1638)

Lead Sponsors

• Sens. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and John Barrasso (R-WY) and
• Reps. Barbara Lee (D-CA-12) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA-01)

Provisions

» Increase Medicare Reimbursement Rates for clinical social workers (CSWs) from 75 percent to 85 percent of the Physician Fee Schedule.

» Increase Access to Clinical Social Work (CSW) Services for Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) Residents by allowing CSWs to bill independently at SNFs.

» Provide Access to CSW Services that Help Medicare Beneficiaries Who are Coping with Physical Health Conditions by reimbursing CSWs for providing Health and Behavior Assessment and Intervention (HBAI) services.

Ask: Cosponsor and support passage.

__________

The School Social Workers Improving Student Success Act (H.R. 1415)

Lead Sponsors

• Reps. Gwen Moore (D-WI-04) and
• Barbara Lee (D-CA-12)

Provisions

» Provide grants to elementary and secondary schools to hire and retain the minimum ratio of one school social worker for every 250 students and one school social worker for every 50 students for high need areas.

» Establish the National Technical Assistance Center for School Social Work, which would provide strategies on improving the effectiveness of school social work, identify areas of improvement for school social work programs, work with agencies on disseminating data on best practices, and establish school social work development programing.

Ask: In the Senate, seek an original sponsor. In the House: cosponsor and support passage.

__________

The More Social Workers in Libraries Act (H.R. 3006)

Lead Sponsors:

Rep. Sylvia Garcia (D-TX-29), Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA-12), and Rep. Hillary Scholten (D-MI-03)

Provisions:

» Fund an internship for social work university students in a regional public library.

» Employ a qualified social worker in a regional public library to oversee social work student interns.

Ask: In the Senate: seek an original Senate sponsor. In the House: cosponsor and support passage.

__________

The Community Mental Wellness and Resilience Act (S. 1452/H.R. 3073)

Lead Sponsors:

• Sen. Edward Markey (D-MA) and
• Reps. Paul Tonko (D-NY-20) and
• Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA-01)

Provisions:

» Establish a competitive grant program at the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to create, operate, or expand community-based programs that use a public health approach to build mental wellness and resilience.

» Support community initiatives to build their own developmental and culturally appropriate strategies to enhance and sustain population level mental wellness and resilience, with specific attention to high-risk individuals.

Ask: Cosponsor and support passage.

__________

NASW is sponsoring a July 20, 2023, Congressional briefing on the Community Mental Wellness and Resilience Act.

You can advocate for support for these bills and others, by responding to NASW’s action alerts.

Increasingly, social workers are recognizing the impact of environmental health and climate change on the individuals and communities they serve. Recent federal initiatives can inform practice by helping social workers to understand vulnerabilities and opportunities at the local level.

Social workers can help families identify the connection between the environment and health, and they may support community members to advocate for solutions to environmental issues.

For example, heat-related illness during the summer months is preventable, but tragically leads to illness and death for hundreds of people every year in the United States according to the CDC. People living in urban areas face higher temperatures and concentrated exposure to heat because of the landscape, and particular neighborhoods within cities can be significantly hotter than others. On an individual level, social workers can educate individuals about the dangers of heat exposure in outdoor and indoor settings– especially for vulnerable older adults, children, and those who work outside– and help families gain access to air condition or cooling centers. At the community level, social workers may advocate for solutions such as increasing trees and vegetation in urban spaces and promoting public access to air-conditioned spaces.

Justice40

In January 2021, President Biden made a commitment across federal agencies through the Justice40 Initiative, created by Executive Order 14008, requiring investments to benefit underserved communities that historically have been overburdened by pollution and environmental hazards. The Administration identified 21 programs to start as pilot programs of the Justice40 initiative, and since that time, the number of covered federal programs has grown significantly.

The goals of the Justice40 initiative are to engage communities and residents in identifying local needs and work to advance sustainable solutions in seven specific areas: climate change, clean energy and energy efficiency, clean transit, affordable and sustainable housing, training and workforce development, remediation and reduction of legacy pollution, and the development of critical clean water and wastewater infrastructure.

Tools have been created by both the federal government and outside organizations to support implementation and tracking and ensure that the vision of Justice40 is fully realized.

The Administration created the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool to identify “disadvantaged” communities that would benefit most from engagement and investment. Harvard Law School maintains the Federal Environmental Justice Tracker to provide up-to-date information about federal government activity in this area. External groups have also recommended improvements to various aspects of the program to make sure that it benefits the communities in greatest need. For example, Urban Institute issued detailed recommendations in November 2022 in Positioning Justice40 for Success, A Policy and Practice Playbook.

Other Federal Initiatives

Other administrative actions and legislation have brought new opportunities such as:

• The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 committed historic investments to advance clean energy and address climate change at the state and community level. It also provides benefits to households, contractors, and others through incentives and tax credits to lower the costs for energy-efficient household upgrades. The RewiringAmerica website provides fact sheets and information for households to access savings available. Harvard Law School has created a detailed table of benefits of the IRA and eligible applicants for funding.  
• In 2021 The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) established the Office of Climate Change and Health Equity (OCCHE) to address the national health impacts of climate change.
• Advisory boards within the White House have been established to advance environmental justice progress:
  • White House Environmental Justice Interagency Council (IAC)
  • White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council (WHEJAC)
  • White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)
• HHS launched the Heath Sector Climate Pledge for health organizations to commit to reduce emissions and share climate resilience plans.
• The Environmental Justice Scorecard was created to track Federal agency performance on environmental justice, including on the Justice40 Initiative.
• In 2022, the Administration launched Heat.gov through an interagency collaboration to provide to provide tools and information to reduce the health risks of extreme heat.

The Biden Administration has taken significant steps in acknowledging the disproportionate burden of environmental hazards particularly on low-income and communities of color and facilitating solutions to address them. One issue plaguing communities is a lack of affordable access to clean water, a problem that social workers may come across in their work.

The HHS Administration for Children and Families supports the Low Income Household Water Assistance Program, which is a covered program under the Justice40 initiative. This program operates in 49 states, the District of Columbia, and 97 tribal areas and provides households with support to cover costs for drinking water and wastewater services.

It prioritizes households that are disconnected from water services, or at risk of disconnection, because of past due bills and nonpayment. It also aims to serve people with disabilities, households with young children or older adults, and those with high water costs relative to income. With knowledge of initiatives like the Low Income Household Water Assistance Program, social workers can connect households to supportive programs and help inform state level planning.

Social work’s expertise in addressing the social determinants of health extends to the natural environment, and recent federal actions support the work of social workers in both direct and indirect ways. Social workers can help bring awareness to opportunities through their work with individuals and families, and social workers themselves may be closely involved in community-level projects to improve the environmental conditions in their local area.

NASW supports these initiatives that promote health and well-being nationwide.

Greetings social workers and social work advocates.

It’s done.  HB56, the bill allowing clinical social workers to diagnose within their scope of practice, passed in the Alabama Senate.  It is now ready to be signed into law.

Finally, we see momentum and a sense of solidarity in the field of social work here in Alabama. This legislation is now headed to Governor Kay Ivey for signature. With the update of these regulations by the Alabama Board of Social Work Examiners, social workers of Alabama will officially be able to diagnose.

This is a momentous accomplishment that took the support of many social workers, students, and organizations, including the Alabama State Board of Social Work Examiners, the Alabama Commission on Higher Education, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and of course NASW.  

Special thanks to state Rep. Frances Holk-Jones and Sen. Linda Coleman-Madison and Dr. Dawna Nelson, research fellow Alabama Commission on Higher Education.  Nelson spearheaded the grass root advocacy and coordination to make this a reality.  

This legislation has major implications on practitioners across the country – particularly those in Veteran Heath Care Systems (VAs)  nationwide.

The bill will go into effect three months after the governor signs it into law.

Will Francis, LMSW, said he “saw the writing on the wall” after new laws were implemented in Texas and took action to inform NASW Texas Chapter members about how to stay safe while doing their jobs.

Freedom of Social Work: How the First Amendment Supports Safe Spaces — Francis’ presentation at the state conference — is an informational showcase of what social workers should do and should not do to legally protect themselves and their clients during these current political times.

Francis said he has seen an erosion of safe spaces that allow people to talk about some current issues over the last couple of years, and he knew the chapter needed to provide a “heads-up” to make sure social workers have the right tools. For example, if a client asks a particular question, the social worker needs to know what not to say.

“It’s about where people have safe spaces to talk about issues; it’s 100 percent about that,” he said.

“I had a bunch of people reach out — from private practices, schools, clinics, all settings — saying, “‘I’m afraid [of] what to do with a client.’ The more I heard, the more I knew I had to do something.”

Laws recently passed or those Francis anticipates coming in the next state legislative session are or will be about abortion and gender-affirming care, he said.

Francis worked with Thomas S. Leatherbury, director of the Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law’s First Amendment Clinic and adjunct clinical law professor, to gather information about case laws and case law histories.

“My goal is to provide social workers with the confidence that they have the laws and HIPAA and Code of Ethics (to defend themselves) against any person who says, ‘You have to’ or ‘You can’t’ talk to a client about that,” he said.

“It’s an important connection when you engage with a client and you listen and respond. If social workers can’t talk, that goes away.”

Licenses and the work itself could be at risk if a civil situation or criminal situation is brought up, he said, and the First Amendment, the Code of Ethics and HIPAA all are about areas that impact practice.

“That the work itself could lead to an impact on their career, that’s what they’re afraid of,” Francis said. “Our advice is to get educated about what your rights are. You know how HIPAA works. The Code of Ethics is bigger than NASW; it’s the foundation of social work. People need to write them into policies.”

Our professional Code of Ethics is foundational to what we do, he said.

“It can work as a form of protection that can help you focus on how to respond to what is brought to you. The more you use, the more you can use as a defense later. What I’m talking about is a defense to social work.”

Read the full story in NASW Social Work Advocates magazine.

In a recent surprise announcement, President Biden informed the nation that he was taking two significant steps related to federal marijuana policy. In that announcement, he stated that his administration will pardon individuals who have been convicted in federal court of simple possession of marijuana. However, the vast majority of those arrested, convicted, and incarcerated for possession of marijuana are decided in state criminal legal systems.

Recent FBI data regarding low-level marijuana possession as a crime shows there was one marijuana arrest every 90 seconds in this nation in 2020. Nationally, there were more than 315,000 marijuana possession arrests in 2020, accounting for one out of three drug arrests. Despite the fact people of all races sell drugs at similar rates people who are Black are 3.64 times more likely to be arrested for a marijuana offense than people who are White.

For those compelling reason, President Biden called on all governors to follow the White House’s lead and pardon individuals charged with simple marijuana possession offenses in their states. The fact is that, given the exceptionally small number of people in the federal Department of Corrections for simple possession, it is critical that governors join the President in issuing pardons. This is the only way the pardon policy can have significant impact. That said, the President should be commended for publicly taking a clear and unambiguous position that all simple marijuana possession convictions must be wiped away under both state and federal law.

It is no secret that overcriminalization across the board has been endemic in the United States for years. Therefore, it is encouraging that in his announcement the President has acknowledged the significant harm that is caused by criminalizing people for minor marijuana offenses. He also acknowledged that there are clear racial disparities in unwarranted criminalization — especially when it comes to marijuana enforcement. Biden’s acknowledgement shows he has taken the very first concrete steps at the federal level to begin to undo harmful collateral consequences resulting from locking up people for simple possession of marijuana.

While we all applaud his new pardon policy, the President’s statement that he is in favor of removing marijuana from being a Schedule I drug is more significant. A great deal of harm can be linked to this ill-advised policy. However, Biden’s action to  task the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) with reviewing the marijuana scheduling gives pause to many drug policy reform advocates. They are fearful that — instead of completely removing marijuana from the DEA Schedule —the administration will simply move it from a Schedule I drug to a lower level.

Not only is it senseless to treat marijuana as a Schedule I drug— along with heroin —the damage that scheduling marijuana does to individuals and to drug policy is incalculable. Moreover, to meaningfully achieve federal marijuana reform, marijuana must be completely removed from the Controlled Substance Act (CSA) . To be clear, a review of marijuana scheduling is long overdue. However, the Biden administration must not lose sight on the fact that unless marijuana is completely descheduled and decriminalized, the harms of prohibition will continue. The implications of continuing to schedule marijuana as a Schedule I drug can be summed up as follows:

• Noncitizens will continue to face the threat of automatic detention and deportation even when in compliance with their state and local laws.
• Citizens will continue to be denied federal benefits due to marijuana convictions.
• Marijuana research will continue to face hindrances.
• Veterans will not be able to access state medical cannabis programs through their V.A. doctors
• Federal employees will continue to be fired for using marijuana after work hours (even if they live in a state with legal adult use).
• Social equity entrepreneurs and marijuana businesses will not have access to funding through the Small Business Administration.
• Banks will still likely be hesitant to offer commercial loans to marijuana businesses.

The following statement from a leading drug policy organization effectively sums up the proposed next steps that reform advocate recommends:

“We welcome this move from President Biden, and it is long overdue. But it is not enough and leaves a lot of our loved ones out, which is why we need descheduling and decriminalization. Without this, people will continue to face criminal charges for marijuana. It also means that research will continue to be inhibited and states that have legalized marijuana will still be at odds with federal law. Descheduling marijuana is the only way to truly end federal prohibition. That’s why we urge the President and Congress to support the,  Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act  introduced in the Senate earlier this year, which would fully remove marijuana from the Control Substances Act, provide expungement and resentencing for past marijuana convictions beyond simple possession, and comprehensively repair the harms of marijuana criminalization.” — Maritza Perez, Director Office of Federal Affairs Drug Policy Alliance.

Again, the Biden Administration should be commended and supported in its effort to bring fairness, equity, and common sense to the nation’s policy approach to marijuana use. The administration’s acknowledgement that the time has come to end criminalization of low-level marijuana possession is a beginning —as is the planned review of classification of marijuana as a Schedule I drug.

At the same time, President Biden should be reminded that these steps are lagging behind where the American public opinion  is  about marijuana use. The administration should also be reminded that currently Nineteen states and the District of Columbia have approved adult possession and consumption of marijuana (Twenty-seven states and the District of Columbia have decriminalized small amounts of marijuana). It is time for federal drug policy to catch up with most Americans and with state legislators.

Resources

• Drug Policy Alliance (DPA)
• Drug Policy Reform Work Group – The Justice Roundtable
• White House Statement from President Biden on Marijuana Reform

About the Author

Mel Wilson, LCSW, MBA, is the retired Senior Policy Advisor for the National Association of Social Workers. He continues to be active on a range social policy area including youth justice, immigration, criminal justice, and drug policy. He is a co-chairperson on the Justice Roundtable’s Drug Policy Reform Working Group.

Disclaimer: The National Association of Social Workers invites members to share their expertise and experiences through Member Voices. This blog was prepared by Mel Wilson in his personal capacity and does not necessarily reflect the view of the National Association of Social Workers.

The Council of State Governments (CSG) has drafted interstate licensing compact legislation for social workers that must be adopted by individual states. CSG is also accepting public comment on the legislation.

NASW is also holding Facebook Live events with CSG to allow stakeholders to learn more about the draft legislation and ask questions. Take time to watch the Interstate Licensing Compact Stakeholder July 26 Review Session.

You can also download slides from the presentation:

Social Work Licensure Compact Stakeholder Review Slides

American Promise joined forces with the National Association of Social Workers and Congressional Research Institute for Social Work and Policy on June 27, 2022, for a conversation on “The Power of Political Social Work.”

Social workers witness how the influence of money in politics is shaping and reinforcing systems that increasingly benefit wealthy donors and special interest groups; this hampers their work to address and redress inequality and injustices that affect Americans and their families across the country. America has a big problem with money in politics. The powerful few smother the voices of more than 330 million Americans and until this imbalance is fixed and the voice of every person matters, we will never address America’s most pressing challenges.

Alongside health care professionals and so many other Americans working on the frontlines of broken systems, social workers are increasingly realizing the need to address the root causes of the issues we face if we are to meet our highest aspirations to serve our clients and country. More social workers are running for office. Others are participating in social justice movements.

I identify as a Political Social Worker and after many years of working with the health care system, veterans, parents, students, and others in deeply challenging situations, I now work with American Promise and millions of Americans who are uniting to amend the Constitution to ensure an equal voice, election integrity, and freedom from the dominance of big money in our political system. American Promise brings Social Workers and Americans together to restore our democracy, advocate for equal voice and representation, empower communities to determine their needs, and advocate for structural reform and adjustments that benefit every American.

The time is right for more Political Social Work: social work practice, theory, and research that focuses on the use of policy and politics to create social change. The American Promise For Our Freedom Amendment is a direct step into enhancing equality and justice for all by reducing the influence of wealthy donors and special interest groups and restoring the voice of everyday Americans. Learn more about the For Our Freedom Amendment here. I urge my fellow Social Work colleagues to join me in this great effort to become involved in social and political action that seeks to ensure that all people have total access to the resources, employment opportunities, and services required to meet basic human needs!

Dr. Jessica Hare, BSW, MSW, DSW, serves as vice president-outreach at American Promise, a nonpartisan organization advocating a For Our Freedom Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to enable better regulation of how money is used in elections. Her social work experience has served new mothers, domestic violence victims, health care workers, children in schools, veterans, and others.

Disclaimer: The National Association of Social Workers invites members to share their expertise and experiences through Member Voices. This blog was prepared by Dr. Jessica Hare in her personal capacity and does not necessarily reflect the view of the National Association of Social Workers.