[John S Mosby]

If they use “medical” as a reason, the fed gov CANNOT “butt out”...there being an FDA and all.

Getting it there by “taxing it to control it” — nope.

If they just legalized it then it is a test case, and we know how that would go— there having been a War Between the States over another “state’s rights” economic question.

Yep, ready for a blast on that last one.

[Ken H]

If they use “medical” as a reason, the fed gov CANNOT “butt out”...there being an FDA and all.

The FDA depends on the Wickard Commerce Clause for its existence. I thought your middle name was 'States Rights'.

Getting it there by “taxing it to control it” — nope.

So you would piss on the Tenth Amendment because you don't like the policy. Furthermore, you've just supported the Wickard Commerce Clause.

You need a new middle name.