Where does it say that in the Constitution? It should be up to the elected representatives of each state to make these laws not the Court. Another attempt by the court to take over the country.
Constitution? They don't need no steenkin' Constitution!
Sadly,
The Bush administration supported this expansion of federal power. Anybody remember the so-called 10th amendment?
Where's a good strict constructionist when you need 5 of 'em?
It doesn't say. They relied on a decades old ruling concerning an individual's right to grow wheat for their own consumption...stating that it was regulated under interstate commerce.
The federal drug laws have never done so. Hysterical rascist (at the time, early 1900's -- the KKK was redux and ascendant the drug laws were viewed as needed to control the wastrel and violent negro.)
The Federal drug laws are unConstitutional Legislative overreach.
The Court ruled based on Federal Law. Federal Law trumps state laws which conflict, per the Constitution's supremacy clause.
I think that this decision by the USSC is an infringement upon state's rights. It's terrible.
I'm not a pot smoker, but am sad to see this grab for power.
I'm inclined to disagree with the idea of slipping a "medical" excuse for toking, given that I have smoked the bong before when I was younger and in retrospect see absolutely NO redeeming qualities to marijuana. That aside, I'm inclined to agree with you. I'm indignated that the MIB would make such rulings. Any such thing is up to the states and the people, not the courts. The courts have adbicated their judical duties and have become a supreme legislature, with poweres superceeding Congress and without power of presidential veto. What does that make them???? Tyrants. Between overbearing courts and bureacracies at every level of society, we have traded one tyrant 3000 miles away for 3000 tyrants a mile away.