[Will88]

A federal court finds a situation where state law should not be trumped by federal law? Wonders never cease, but since it involved pot, this probably isn’t anything to get excited about.

[Ken H]

A federal court finds a situation where state law should not be trumped by federal law?

I think the court is saying the Executive branch is violating a law passed by Congress, ie the Rohrbacher Amendment.

[ModelBreaker]

“A federal court finds a situation where state law should not be trumped by federal law? “

Actually, it isn’t that good a decision. Wish it were. The Court enforced an existing federal law barring Obama from spending money to prosecute medical MJ cases. So the court was just enforcing a federal law. Not vindicating states rights.

It would have been a better decision had it been based on the commerce clause. But the Supreme Court ruled against that approach a while back (one of Justice Thomas’s few bad decisions).

[Axenolith]

If that precedent sticks, that camels nose under the tent works a hell of a lot better for us than the enemy!

[gunsequalfreedom]

A federal court finds a situation where state law should not be trumped by federal law? Wonders never cease, but since it involved pot, this probably isn’t anything to get excited about.

[Mariner]

Actually they are compelling enforcement of a Federal law prohibiting the Feds from interfering with the state laws.

I wish it was a 10th Amendment ruling, but it is not.