Federal government already fighting state's rights in marijuana legalization
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-11-2012, 12:00 AM
RE: Federal government already fighting state's rights in marijuana legalization
(12-11-2012 07:28 PM)Chas Wrote:  However, why did banning alcohol require an amendment and banning marijuana does not?

Because, marijuana's bad, m'kay?

Smile

[Image: a6505fe8.jpg]
I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours.
-Hunter S. Thompson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-11-2012, 10:46 AM
RE: Federal government already fighting state's rights in marijuana legalization
(12-11-2012 07:28 PM)Chas Wrote:  Yes, it needs a Constitutional test. Strict constructionists would say that this is over-stepping, more federalist interpretation would invoke the general welfare. And strict constructionists would disagree with your statement that any of it was written broadly.

As more states legalize medical use and decriminalize simple possession, there will likely be enough friction to create a suit in federal court that will go to the Supreme Court.

However, why did banning alcohol require an amendment and banning marijuana does not?

I don't really know. I would just assume it was because they wanted to prohibit alcohol indefinitely and unquestionably.

Marijuana is just placed under Schedule 1 of the Controlled Substance Act. That's not a permanent prohibition, it just places the drug under federal regulation. It can be overturned, and the drugs can be decriminalized in a number of ways. I'm sure, just like Obama did with immigration after the Dream Act couldn't be passed, that by executive order, the President could order certain restrictions to not be enforced. Also, I'm sure the Department of Justice has a say on what they go after, and Congress can change the law.

I guess it's a difference of being federal law versus being Constitutional law.

As far as medical marijuana goes, the Supreme Court ruled that even when states legalizes marijuana for medical purposes, that the federal level still has authority to criminalize it and enforce the law under the Commerce and Necessary and Proper Clauses.

Even Scalia ruled in favor, and he knew the founding fathers.

There are always going to be disagreements on constitutionality, and that's why you get 5-4 decisions. Also, the opinions they write, a lot of the time, end up meaning a hell of a lot more than the actual ruling. I'm not much for judicial activism and/or ruling laws unconstitutional. Unless it blatantly goes against our Constitution, which is should rarely happen given that all branches have to uphold it, I don't really like when they strike down laws, especially 5-4.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2012, 06:30 PM
RE: Federal government already fighting state's rights in marijuana legalization
Saw Washington State on the news yesterday.

It's legal to have personal weed etc.. but illegal to buy and sell it??

wtf?

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: