Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 12/09/2025 2:34:54 PM PST by DFG
The U.S. Supreme Court will announce on December 15 whether it will hear a major challenge to federal marijuana bans brought by state-licensed cannabis companies, a decision that could force a reckoning between national law and the patchwork of state-legal markets.
The justices are slated to discuss the petition in Canna Provisions Inc. v. Garland during a private conference on December 12. Four votes are needed to grant review, which would make it the first time the Court directly weighs the constitutionality of federal prohibition amid widespread state legalization.
Massachusetts-based plaintiffs Canna Provisions, Gyasi Sellers, Wiseacre Farm, and Verano Holdings argue in their October petition that the Controlled Substances Act’s (CSA) Schedule I classification for marijuana violates the Commerce Clause by criminalizing purely intrastate activity compliant with state regulations. They seek to overturn the 2005 Gonzales v. Raich ruling, which upheld federal authority over homegrown cannabis in California.
The case stems from a federal lawsuit dismissed by a lower court and rejected by the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in May. The plaintiffs, represented by Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, contend Congress has effectively abandoned enforcement against state programs, creating untenable conflicts for businesses operating legally under local laws.
The Justice Department waived its right to respond on Monday, with Solicitor General D. John Sauer stating, “The Government hereby waives its right to file a response to the petition in this case, unless requested to do so by the Court.”
A response was due November 28.
Support for the petition has grown from limited-government advocates. The Americans for Prosperity Foundation, founded by Charles Koch, filed an amicus brief Wednesday urging the Court to take the case and overrule Raich.
“The general power of governing rests with the States — not the federal government — and that most decisions should be made at the state and local levels, reflecting the needs and priorities of their communities,” the group wrote, per Marijuana Moment.
It called the CSA “an affront to our system of federalism” when applied to in-state operations with “no empirically demonstrable link to interstate commerce.”
The brief labeled Raich “a constitutional aberration” and pressed justices to “sweep Raich into the dustbin,” arguing the case offers a chance to align Commerce Clause precedent with the Constitution’s original meaning.
“The sky will not fall if this Court takes that modest step. On the contrary, our constitutional republic will be healthier for it.”
The Cato Institute and Pacific Legal Foundation have also signaled plans to submit friend-of-the-court briefs in favor.
Lead attorney Josh Schiller expressed cautious optimism to Marijuana Moment, saying he’s “hopeful” — albeit somewhat “nervous” — about the outcome. “Time is of the essence,” he added. “We think that this is the right time for this case because of the need — the industry needs to get relief from federal oversight at the moment.”
A favorable ruling could dismantle decades of prohibition, but denial would preserve the status quo, potentially with relisting for future review. Justice Clarence Thomas hinted at openness to revisiting Raich in a 2021 statement, noting that post-Raich policies have “greatly undermined its reasoning” through lax enforcement and congressional protections for medical programs.
“Whatever the merits of Raich when it was decided, federal policies of the past 16 years have greatly undermined its reasoning,” Thomas wrote, decrying a “half-in, half-out regime that simultaneously tolerates and forbids local use of marijuana” that “strains basic principles of federalism and conceals traps for the unwary.”
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Crime should not be federalized unless it is strictly a constitutional issue or clear issue of federal law, excluding penny ante federal bs. Local and State. Preferably elected
County sheriff’s and prosecutors. State police chief appointed by gov and an elected state prosecutor.
Easy case. A constitutional amendment was required to ban beer. Therefore, a constitutional amendment is required to ban marijuana.
When MA said that homosexuals could be married, the Supreme Court jumped in and declared that it would be chaos to have some states say Yes and some say No. So all states had to say Yes to homosexual marriage.
Well, a whole bunch of states have given the finger to federal marijuana laws. I don’t see how the Supreme Court can allow some to say Yes and some to say No.
The SC allowed some states to have abortions and others to not have abortions.
“The general power of governing rests with the States — not the federal government — and that most decisions should be made at the state and local levels, reflecting the needs and priorities of their communities,” the group wrote, per Marijuana Moment.”
Yeah...what about gay marriage?
No more “poor starving cancer patients” horsesh!t!
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Similar to the Ninth Amendment, the Tenth originated from the debates surrounding the inclusion of a bill of rights to the new Constitution.
Amendment 10 – “Powers to the States or to the People”
Ronald Reagan Presidential Library (.gov)
https://www.reaganlibrary.gov › constitutional-amendm...
If this case overturns Raich it should, by extension, overturn Wickard. Wickard is a huge overreach of FedGov power.
Why was the Volstead Act necessary to ban Alcohol?? I once read a pretty good paper on our Drug Laws and how Marijuana became illegal at the Federal Level. The Forbidden Fruit and the Tree of knowledge. Virginia Law School I believe.
I am so sick if the stink of weed everywhere I go. (Memphis)
We’ve been told all it does it make a group of guys want to “start a band.” Here’s a few of the “bands”:
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4337532/posts Cannabis Hyperemesis Syndrome: What Is the Illness Sending More Teens to Emergency Room?
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4334179/posts Cannabis Poisoning of Kids is What Happens When You Legalize Drugs
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4240199/posts ‘I really thought I was going to prison’: Woman who killed man during marijuana-induced psychosis speaks out
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4223571/posts Daily Weed Smokers 25% More Likely to Have Heart Attack, 42% Higher Stroke Risk: AHA
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4221693/posts REVEALED: Chinese gangs are behind THOUSANDS of illegal weed farms across the US - sparking fears that CCP could become new cannabis kingpins
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4183112/posts Health effects of weed laid bare: Marijuana is behind 3 in 10 schizophrenia cases, can be a death sentence in pregnant users, but Biden STILL wants to ease restrictions on the drug
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4122354/posts Cannabis-related emergency room visits on the rise among older adults in California: study
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4128729/posts Mexican Cartel-Style Violence Spreading in California over Marijuana Grow Fields
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4032377/posts What a drag: Older pot smokers trigger surge in demand for mental-health services
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4069296/posts Cannabis and the Violent Crime Surge
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4070560/posts Cases of Cannabis-Induced Psychosis Rise. Lawmakers Want to Add Mental Health Warnings to Pot Products
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3739774/posts Marijuana and psychosis: Real data, real bad
What if Florida issues me permit to build machine guns and surface-to-air missiles?
My daughter had a hard time getting off of marijuana. She said now that she’s off, she can sleep better.
There is nothing in my copy of the Constitution that says anything about the Federal government having authority over what I put in my body.
If ANYTHING is a ‘State’s Rights’ issue, this is it.
And some here have mentioned same sex marriage.
The supreme court imposed same sex marriage on the entire country, even though the vast majority of states had defined marriage as being a man and a woman.
So are there consistent criteria for federal regulations,
Versus things that are to be left to the states? Or do courts make it up as they go along issue by issue?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.