Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: shellshocked

I was surprised that Scalia didn't dissent as well, he's usually a hardline state's rights kinda guy.
I still don't understand how the commerce clause allows for the black market to play into 'commerce'.


9 posted on 06/06/2005 8:02:27 PM PDT by Nipplemancer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: Nipplemancer

Time to hit the reset button and re-boot.


11 posted on 06/06/2005 8:04:30 PM PDT by Hunble (U.S. Army for 20 years)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Nipplemancer

"I was surprised that Scalia didn't dissent as well, he's usually a hardline state's rights kinda guy."

Yeah, me and one of the attys at work are keen to read his reasoning on this. Hopefully he spelled it out.

Seems like just another judicial fiat. The law is what we'd like it to be at any given moment, on any given subject, on any capricious whim.

NOT GOOD.


15 posted on 06/06/2005 8:11:07 PM PDT by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Nipplemancer
I've been wondering that too.

Is it possible, that maybe... it has something to do with the states which haven't "legalized" """MEDICINAL""" pot? And how the interstate commerce laws MIGHT be a problem? Do you think.. the States, themselves, which have legalized pot should erect a border control between states which haven't legalized pot -- to prevent the "carrying out of a legal state" into an "unlegalized state" pot?

Just batting ideas here with you.

21 posted on 06/06/2005 8:54:14 PM PDT by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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