Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: ChrisInAR
There are many of us on the Right that support the re-legalization of marijuana

You can't tell your Right from your Left.

Conservative:

"Drugs like marijuana are fungible commodities. As the Court explains, marijuana that is grown at home and possessed for personal use is never more than an instant from the interstate market–and this is so whether or not the possession is for medicinal use or lawful use under the laws of a particular State." --Justice Antonin Scalia

Leftist:

“…There is just too much money to be made both by the people who grow marijuana and the cities and counties that would be able to tax it.” --Willie Brown

95 posted on 09/27/2009 4:32:05 PM PDT by Mojave (Don't blame me. I voted for McClintock.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies ]


To: Mojave
Whatever...ROTFLMAO.

"Two of my favorite things are sitting on my front porch smoking a pipe of sweet hemp, and playing my Hohner harmonica." -- Abraham Lincoln;

"Prohibition... goes beyond the bound of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded" -Abraham Lincoln

97 posted on 09/27/2009 4:39:35 PM PDT by ChrisInAR (The Tenth Amendment is still the Supreme Law of the Land, folks -- start enforcing it for a CHANGE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies ]

To: Mojave
Thomas, not Benito Scalia, is the conservative when it comes to the drug war and federalism:
"Respondent's local cultivation and consumption of marijuana is not "Commerce ... among the several States."

Certainly no evidence from the founding suggests that "commerce" included the mere possession of a good or some personal activity that did not involve trade or exchange for value. In the early days of the Republic, it would have been unthinkable that Congress could prohibit the local cultivation, possession, and consumption of marijuana."

"If the Federal Government can regulate growing a half-dozen cannabis plants for personal consumption (not because it is interstate commerce, but because it is inextricably bound up with interstate commerce), then Congress' Article I powers -- as expanded by the Necessary and Proper Clause -- have no meaningful limits. Whether Congress aims at the possession of drugs, guns , or any number of other items, it may continue to "appropria[te] state police powers under the guise of regulating commerce."

"If the majority is to be taken seriously, the Federal Government may now regulate quilting bees, clothes drives, and potluck suppers throughout the 50 States. This makes a mockery of Madison's assurance to the people of New York that the "powers delegated" to the Federal Government are "few and defined", while those of the States are "numerous and indefinite."

Scalia is a fair weather federalist on this issue:

[What about Justice Scalia? He did not join the majority opinion, resting his decision on the Necessary and Proper Clause, which he had previously described in Printz v. U.S. as "the last, best hope of those who defend ultra vires congressional action." In his concurring opinion in Raich, Justice Scalia appears to put his commitment to majoritarianism over his commitment to originalism. Yet this decision does run counter to his oft-expressed insistence that the people should act to protect their un-enumerated rights in state political processes rather than in federal court.

Here this is exactly what the citizens of California and ten other states have done, but Justice Scalia's new stance on the Necessary and Proper Clause leaves citizens little, if any, room to protect their liberty from federal encroachment in the future. It has always seemed significant that he never joined Justice Thomas's originalist concurrences in Lopez and Morrison. Nor does he explain why Justice Thomas's originalist dissent in Raich is historically inaccurate, which would be incumbent on him as an "originalist justice" to do. Instead, Justice Scalia now joins in expanding the reach of the Commerce Clause power beyond even that which the Court had endorsed in Wickard v. Filburn.]

Any grabby grabbing grabber grabboid logic the drug warriors dream up will be applied to guns. And vice versa.

101 posted on 09/27/2009 4:46:05 PM PDT by Palin Republic (Palin - Bachmann 2012 : Girl Power!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson