Jindal: Too many locked up over pot

CNN ^ | Feb 2, 2014 | CNN

[dead]

I would rather eliminate EBTs all together, but certainly wouldn't support them for anybody who tests positive for drugs.

Also, I know many people who smoke pot and are quite successful in their careers. More power to them as long as their pot smoking doesn't put anybody at risk.

[Ken H]

The New Deal Commerce Clause that allows the federal drug war also allows fedgov to steal your taxes for things like EBT cards.

Why not honor the Constitution and support the Tenth Amendment in both cases?

[Para-Ord.45]

1. States do not have to enforce laws they think are unconstitutional.

2.Congress cannot mandate States enact specific laws.

3.Individuals are not exempt from the Federal laws the State refuses to enforce.

Printz v. United States, New York v. United States, Ableman v. Booth and Federalist 78

[Ken H]

3.Individuals are not exempt from the Federal laws the State refuses to enforce.

Then you must be in favor of fedgov enforcing federal gun-grabber laws against individuals despite what steps a state takes to protect its citizens.

Don't be selective in your enforcement, now. Stand up and tell Arizonans your position loud and proud.

[Para-Ord.45]

Then you must be in favour of Virginia continuing it`s ban on inter-racial marriage, southern States` schools would still not be integrated, Chicago`s gun bans would still be in effect.

USSC on nullification, “is not a constitutional doctrine … it is illegal defiance of constitutional authority.”

THAT is why Mark Levin doesn`t believe in nullification and does believe in an Article V convention.

[VideoDoctor]

Jindal: Too many locked up over pot

I'll go you one better Governor... NOT NEARLY ENOUGH WASHINGTON POLITICIANS LOCKED UP.

[Ken H]

Then you must be in favour of Virginia continuing it`s ban on inter-racial marriage, southern States` schools would still not be integrated, Chicago`s gun bans would still be in effect.

No. The examples you gave violate a right, privilege or immunity of American citizens. They run afoul of the 14th Amendment in the first two cases, and the Second Amendment in the third. No level of government may violate the constitutional rights of American citizens.

USSC on nullification, “is not a constitutional doctrine … it is illegal defiance of constitutional authority.”

USSC on abortion =>
USSC on Obamacare =>

[Para-Ord.45]

You`re being irrational.

Nullification is a double-edged sword.

If someone like you can use it in the cause of Natural Law then those States who are neo-marxist can use it in their cause.

That`s why Mark Levin rejects nullification

[Ken H]

If someone like you can use it in the cause of Natural Law then those States who are neo-marxist can use it in their cause.

Legislatures can pass any law they like, it does not mean the law comports with the Constitution.

OTOH, fedgov can impose a marxist agenda on the states and the people, but you have removed nullification as an option to fight it. Our rights are not to be trampled by ANY level of government. Walter Williams has it right.