[JRandomFreeper]

Much of the MJ crop doesn't have to be sold across state lines, and isn't. But the feds dig in anyway. They need put back in the constitutional box they came in. Uphold the 10th and get rid of the 17th would be a good start.

And some now disagree that the commerce clause allows what you are saying.

/johnny

[OneWingedShark]

Much of the MJ crop doesn't have to be sold across state lines, and isn't. But the feds dig in anyway. They need put back in the constitutional box they came in. Uphold the 10th and get rid of the 17th would be a good start.

It's actually worse than that; by the interpretation of the commerce clause we have now, congress can regulate things that are never sold. Justice Thomas's dissent of Raich starts off with the following paragraph:

Respondents Diane Monson and Angel Raich use marijuana that has never been bought or sold, that has never crossed state lines, and that has had no demonstrable effect on the national market for marijuana. If Congress can regulate this under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually anything–and the Federal Government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers.

And it's true: if not-commerce is considered to fall under the power of commerce, then the entire system is logically inconsistent and you can justify ANYTHING.