From the April 2006 Idaho Observer:

Declatory judgment could end drug war

MIAMI—U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has been summoned to appear in a CIVIL SUIT FOR DECLATORY JUDGMENT filed by Duane Olson, currently serving time in a Florida federal prison for a drug-related conviction.

Olson has been coordinating several cases in an effort to test the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984—the Reagan-era act that gave birth to the federal war on drugs that currently has about one million prisoners of war in custody—and find its legal weaknesses. Olson, who has spent the last several years scrutinizing the act from conception through the legislative process to present, calls PublicLaw 98-473 a "cryptogram."

In Duane R. Olson v. The United States, Olson filed for declatory judgment for clarification of one key issue: What does "...any person..." mean with regard to enforcing the provisions of Title 21 U.S.C, Section 841(a)(1)?

After studying every piece of paper he can find relating to the act, studying every government response to every judicial proceeding with which Olson has been intimately involved—as well as others relevant to the unraveling of the drug war "cryptogram," Olson is now asking the court to rule on the meaning of "...any person..."

"The Supreme Court and all inferior courts have ‘advertised’ that, for the executive to ‘operate’ Title 21, Section 841(a)(1) as a ‘common law crime’ that makes it ‘[u]nlawful for "any person"’ to possess, manufacture, distribute or dispense drugs or other controlled substances. This is not enforceable because, if it were, there would be no point in stopping by the drug store on the way home from the office to pick up prescription drugs now would there?" Olson observed.

Further, Olson noted in his complaint that definitions are provided in law for every operative word or phrase in the statute with the exception of "any person." Olson finds this curious since, by constructive implication, the term, as interpreted by drug warriors, "is the only two words of the 34-words in the text of the statute Section 841(a)(1), advertised by the judicial and operated by the executive, to imply federal jurisdiction and federal police power over every single person on this planet!"

Olson is optimistic. His patience and dedication to this area of investigation has given him such command of the subject mater that he can now enjoy the luxury of simplification in this matter. His belief that he has the court and possibly the current drug war general over a barrel is evidenced by an attempt by the court to trick him into changing his federal question (pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1331 and 1334(a)(3)) into a "prisoner civil rights" case.

The $250 filing fee has been paid, AG Gonzales has been summonsed and now Olson and the court await a response. It should be a simple task: Define the meaning of the phrase "any person" as it is used in the text of Title 21, Section 841(a)(1).

Though the issues are complicated in a legal sense, Olson believes that the war on drugs has been a fraud, that per the U.S. Constitution it was impossible for the federal government to criminalize the use of drugs and that a "violation" of Title 21, Section 841(a)(1) is not an "Offense against the laws of the United States," but rather a "material breach of contract" by those "Persons registered by the Attorney General" who would knowingly possess, manufacture, distribute or dispense drugs or other substances in a manner not authorized by their registration and signed contract for federal jurisdiction (state and local laws notwithstanding, Olson added).

We will keep our readers posted. Be assured that Olson has anticipated the possible responses from Gonzales and the possible rulings from the court and is prepared to argue them all.

You may access background information in Graham v. Holder 5:05-cv-137Oc-10GRJ