One would think it would refer to federal law instead of personal ideas or local customs (what if a city said all of them were legal—could you do it then?).
Well I can tell you that most people wouldn’t have their security clearance revoked for using marijuana, instead likely rebuked or made to agree to abstain in the future. It would be more serious if illegally purchasing or distributing, of course.
Would you be making this argument if it was anyone else?
Since there’s no case of drug decriminalization or other substances in the USA, I don’t think this is particularly relevant. There’s a reason people are up in arms about MJ scheduling alongside these other substances. Additionally, I know this might sound very general, but the security clearance process is extremely subjective. There is no published set of circumstances for what gets a clearance denied or revoked and what simply gets addressed and mitigated. And I think that’s a good thing. In this case, I don’t think Elon’s partaking in any way indicates, jeopardizes or threatens his loyalty to the US, the likelihood that he could be blackmailed, or his ability to keep secure data secure.
Would you be making the same argument if it wasn’t Elon, but a close friend from school that hit a doobie on his buddy’s local team’s podcast?
Sorry for the ramble, but the clearance process is one I’m very familiar with, and I just see a lot of assumptions and misunderstandings in these threads.
