Replies

"I always thought that juries were supposed to get all the relevent evidence."

They're talking about federal trials. Little Dickie want to introduce into federal court the fact that medical marijuana is "legal" in that particular state where the federal trial is being held.

His hope, with this legislation, is that the juries will then ignore federal law and acquit the guily party.

What is interesting, as ellery points out, is that this legislation is directed at medical marijuana cases only.

My question to you was why the sudden outrage at this particular legfislation that you feel to be unconstitutional as expressed here...

They're in violation of federal law, dickie-boy! I suggest, dickie-boy, that you acquaint yourself with Article VI of the United States Constitution, which you've sworn to uphold, which states that "This Constitution ... shall be the supreme Law of the Land ... and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby ..." Dick Durbin, Sam Farr, and every co-sponsor of this bill should be tried for treason. It is a deliberate subversion of the U.S. Constitution.

Are you willing to show this much outrage towards congresspeople who sponsor gun control legislation, CFR, No Child Left Behind, etc. or are you just trying to satirize constitutionalists?

This actually brings up another interesting Constitutional question as well: why is it that you can be tried for the same crime by states and by the feds? This amounts to double-jeopardy.