The Libertarian case against marijuana legalization

As someone who advocates for drug policies aimed at safeguarding public safety and community health, I frequently speak with New Hampshire state legislators about marijuana legalization. The push for legalization typically falls into predictable political camps: some want legalization so New Hampshire's laws mirror those of other liberal states, a handful of others believe the potential tax revenue is too good to pass up, and Libertarians believe government should not stand between individuals and the personal choices they wish to make.

Marijuana legalization has proven to be a disaster on many levels in other states, including those neighboring New Hampshire. Even Massachusetts voters have had enough. This past December, 74,000 citizens there signed a petition to put a question on the 2026 state ballot to repeal the commercial sale of recreational marijuana there. As for tax revenue, legalization costs states, communities, and families an enormous amount to mitigate the damage done by selling a federally illegal, addictive drug to citizens for profit.

In New Hampshire, the Libertarian push for legalization is the least understood and warrants a closer look. Their premise is that marijuana — and other drugs — should be legal because people have the inherent freedom to make such choices without government interference. That means the individual should have the right to use marijuana recreationally, potentially succumbing to addiction and experiencing the psychoactive effects of today's potent THC products, if they want. It is important to remember that legalizations laws across the U.S. typically establish an age use restriction of 18 to 21 years, which means that people with undeveloped brains (age 25 and below) have unfettered access to a drug that rewires their brains. Sometimes permanently and tragically.

To be clear, I'm not arguing against Libertarianism. Our society could benefit from greater personal responsibility and from letting those who make bad choices bear the consequences. However, we do not live in a Libertarian society and are far from that political watermark. For starters:

• We pay a significant portion of our incomes to offset the cost of a social safety net for those living below a governmentally established income level;

• Our tax dollars fund state services to ensure children have a safe haven, especially when they experience neglect, which increases when states legalize marijuana;

• We pay for law enforcement, a cost that correlates directly with the amount of crime and lawlessness we tolerate through public policy;

• Car insurance premiums are set by aggregators who evaluate accident rates -- including rising DUI numbers tied to drug intoxication -- to determine driver risk;

• Health insurance premiums reflect our collective needs; these costs have risen as emergency rooms see more THC-induced psychosis and Cannabis Hyperemesis Syndrome cases requiring hospitalization;

• Citizens also fund programs to address homelessness, even as drug addiction and mental illness remain the most prevalent contributing factors to homelessness;

• Regardless of politics, most people want more government spending on addiction services for individuals who forfeit their personal dignity and autonomy due to drug misuse;

So, the conundrum is that we can't have it both ways. We can’t cheerlead for the proliferation of more addictive, “recreational” drugs into our communities while our government requires all of us pay for the inevitable cleanup. That isn't Libertarianism.

More personal responsibility across society is a good thing. But those who seek Libertarianism must first advocate for a foundation where hardworking, sober, responsible citizens have the ability to finance their own decisions. Advocating for drug legalization while a governmental dependency system remains in place is irresponsible — and a tone-deaf, virtue-signaling brand of Libertarianism.

Marijuana legalization only ushers in greater financial and societal burdens on taxpayers. Libertarians who advocate for these drug-first policies inadvertently align themselves with the failed political beliefs propagated in big-government states. Marijuana legalization never leads to social justice, better-funded state services, or more personal freedom -- it just leads to more dependency on government.

The hard fact is that marijuana legalization is the opposite of genuine Libertarianism. It's simply where revenue-hungry politicians, liberal policies, and misplaced Libertarian values converge.