Posted on 06/06/2005 8:18:49 AM PDT by Xbvalk
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The federal government has the power to prevent sick patients from smoking home-grown marijuana that a doctor recommended to relieve their chronic pain, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Monday.
The high court decided that a federal law outlawing marijuana applied to two seriously ill California women, even though California is one of at least nine states that allow medical use of marijuana.
Justice John Paul Stevens said for the court majority that the federal law, the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, was a valid exercise of federal power by the Congress "even as applied to the troubling facts of this case."
Whoa!
This is an interesting ruling. I'll have to mull this one over.
OConnor Rehnquist and Thomas Dissented
My first thought is that I'm surprised that the court is deferring to Congress. That is a pleasant surprise.
Interesting title, too. The ruling does nothing of the sort.
Ok,,,,MY copy of the Constitution does not say a thing about drugs! It does say that if it doesn't say a thing about something that it is left to the states or to the people. I wonder where the supreme court got their copy?
Scalia concurred in a separate opinion, agreeing with the socially liberal majority but refusing to buy off on their logic. I'll wager his decision is the most cogent and constitutionally-sound decision of the bunch. He has yet to disappoint.
Scalia and Thomas on opposite sides of the issue.
This will be a veddddy intelesting opinion to read.
What evidence do you have that the supreme court is using a copy?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1417402/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1417426/posts
Isn't Rehnquist the Judge fighting cancer presently? No wonder he dissented!
Oh... 'splains it a bit.
LOL! Brought to you by the same bunch who used your very argument to abolish the power of state legislatures to criminalize sodomy.
what- no right to "privacy"?
im torn on this issue, while I don't like the idea of legal marajauna, I think it is up to the states to decide not the federal government.
I am trying to be consistant on this issue since I also believe that it should be left up to each state to decide if they want to allow abortion.
I'll wager Scalia is trying to smooch up to the administration who brought the case so he can become Chief Injustice.
If the majority reasoning is flawed then their decision is flawed. But he'll go along to get along.
LOL! Anyone who know Scalia knows he doesn't kiss up.
that's a bunch of BS. Most of us could care less what another state decides to do in regards to gay marriage.
Where we have a problem is when a JUDGE and not the state legislature decides, and the fear that an even higher court could impose it on the rest of us.
In a related story, pharmaceutical companies took the day off to celebrate the decision.
I just copied the article....
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.