[Robwin]

This state is in the death grip of "progressives" and they are in the process of destroying it.

[McGavin999]

What a shame, such a beautiful state.

[Do_Tar]

I wonder if the “Not My Pants” defense will work in other situations? Think of the possibilities!

I would list a few, but they might be construed as threats or something.

[43north]

I live just across the border in north Idaho. There are a lot of good,conservative, God-fearing conservatives in eastern Washington. That state needs to be split at the Cascade summit and let the evil ones rule the coastal area. I have no use for them and I doubt many of the easterners do either.

[varyouga]

“The state Supreme Court argued that the mere act of finding an illicit substance on someone’s person or on their property is not enough to prove they had any intent to possess those drugs. In other words, they could unknowingly be in possession of heroin or cocaine and they shouldn’t have to prove to the court that they are innocent. We can pretend this frequently happens, I guess.”

It doesn’t need to happen frequently and there is no need to pretend. There are all kinds of possibilities where someone can not know what they are holding is illegal. Like mixing up checked bags, having a smuggler plant things without your knowledge or buying a car with a hidden stash that is found years later. These things have happened to innocent people. The state should have to prove they actually meant to possess.

Possession laws also give police the power to imprison anyone at will with the only “evidence” needed being a tiny object supposedly found on the person which can easily be taken from other cases.

It is a wide open barn door to fascism. NYPD narcotics was caught widely using this practice to meet quota. Innocent people sat in jail while not a single cop did a minute of time.

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/brooklyn-judge-shocked-cowboy-culture-narcotics-cops-article-1.970874

[Trumpisourlastchance]

Who would want to raise children there?

The national collapse proceeds.

[hanamizu]

The state Supreme Court argued that the mere act of finding an illicit substance on someone’s person or on their property is not enough to prove they had any intent to possess those drugs. In other words, they could unknowingly be in possession of heroin or cocaine and they shouldn’t have to prove to the court that they are innocent.

---

First of all, in American justice you aren’t supposed to have to prove your innocence, the state has to prove your guilt.

But I have to wonder, following the Court’s logic, will this also apply to people in possession of weapons?

[Bobalu]

State laws prohibiting the possession of drugs is constitutional.

Federal laws prohibiting the possession of drugs is NOT constitutional.

That is why it took a constitutional amendment to prohibit alcohol. After the repeal of prohibition it was still constitutional for the states to prohibit it.

The supreme court informed congress that a federal law prohibition marijuana would not be constitutional. So they created the marijuana tax act to require the purchase of a government tax stamp to possess marijuana, then they refused to sell the stamps :-/

It eventually became a situation where the court just looked the other way while the federal government prohibited substance after substance.... that is how the war on drugs began.

[monkeyshine]

I don’t understand the link between drug possession offenders and violent criminals in this article/case. I’m sure there is some overlap, and some addicts commit crimes to finance their drug use. But it makes no sense to link them in the same basket. From a public health and safety standpoint, lock up violent people even if they are also drug addicts. I see no sense in locking up addicts; just keep them clear of decent town folks.

[vpintheak]

Honestly, it’s time to look at forming new states. The people on the eastern side of the range, shouldn’t have to put up with the insanity of the people on the western side.
Break it up.

[Revel]

Just think. The same court could rule that arresting someone for murders is unconstitutional. And there would be nothing anyone could do about it. A bunch of corrupt judges is this country control everything.

[familyop]

"The state Supreme Court argued that the mere act of finding an illicit substance on someone’s person or on their property is not enough to prove they had any intent to possess those drugs."

Test every one of them at the time of arrest then. If they have the drug and intended to have it, they'll test positive while in possession.

[joe fonebone]

The war on drugs was declared and the DEA was formed to go after importers and kingpins.

That was too hard.

Sooooo, in order to justify our existence we will arrest and imprison anyone with any amount on their person or in their home. We will issue no knock warrants and arrest and imprison the end user.

This is much easier and makes us look like we are doing our jobs.

BS.....

This is what happens when the government gets involved. A well intentioned program goes off the rails because it’s Too Hard.

As repulsive as some here will find this decision, I applaud it. It strips the government of power.

Who here can say the government has too little power?

[LouAvul]

This state entire nation is in the death grip of "progressives" and they are in the process of destroying it.

POTUS Trump was, at best, a temporary reprieve. But no way are we going to recover from an all out onslaught from a hard core socialist, globalist, dying, demented president.

This is like watching Rome burn while Nero fiddles.