Medical Marijuana and the End of Federalism

Mens News Daily ^ | 9 June 05 | Yakov Bok

[Blzbba]

"Where does it end?"


Excellent point...yet many pseudo-conservative Freepers are apparently siding with the liberal, pro-federalist POV.

[NJ_gent]

"It is amusing that the conservatives on the SCOTUS sided with the marijuana users whilst the liberals predictably sided with more federalist intervention."

The conservative members of the court, with the exception of Scalia, sided with the rights of states. The liberal members of the court all sided with expanding Federal power under the 'interstate commerce' clause. That's pretty much as predictable as it gets, with the exception of Scalia.

SCOTUS doesn't play checkers, it plays chess - try to keep up.

[JAWs]

So there was a contractual dimension as well. Should have known. Actually, the SC had actually found limits to the CC, mostly in criminal cases... the Gun Free School Zone law was unconstitutional, for example, because the CC's authority did not stretch that far.

[NJ_gent]

"It seems that the SC is grasping for straws, in this case, to involve itself into states rights. A clear violation of the 10th Amendment."

Agreed. In my opinion, it should have deferred to the state's supreme court and stated loudly that it holds no jurisdiction over the case. SCOTUS had no business getting involved in this case to begin with, let alone ruling in favor of the Federal government.

[dirtboy]

Yakov Bok's definition of Federalism was dead before he was even born, unless he's older then 63.

That vision of Federalism was starting to rise from the ashes. But Scalia basically decided federal power to control something he doesn't like matters more than federalism. So the phoenix just got shot down like a clay target.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Does that mean growing your own corn is now illegal?

Not illegal, merely subject to federal regulation.

[patriot_wes]

The bottom line is this - the prices if allowed to set by the free market and not by condition of the illicit activity of smuggling, hiding, confiscation, incarcaration etc would drop to penny cheap for this stupid weed. Through our "drug program" we prop up V. Fox and the entire Mexican government and proxies in this country who are also enriched by the whole fiasco.

As far as the overall judicial / versus "We The People" issue it's simple history repeating itself as it always does.. A republic (if you can't or won't keep it) becomes a democracy and regresses to anarchy.

[NJ_gent]

"because the CC's authority did not stretch that far."

But.. but.. couldn't the bullets travel to another state if the gun went off? Doesn't that make the whole thing interstate commerce?! [/liberal centralist]

[hosepipe]

Home grown for personal use "grass" would dry up much of the marijana market.. Can't have THAT... or home grown tobacco either.. When the drug dealers have clout in congress what would be the normal expectations on those kinds of laws.?.

The odds of marijana being taken off the streets is as bout as doable as hate laws removing "hate".. or Gay marriage producing "morality"..

To many laws, produce less justice- Cicero..

[NJ_gent]

"But Scalia basically decided federal power to control something he doesn't like matters more than federalism."

I think he's just looking ahead to that Chief Justice position, myself. If that's the case, he's just as selfish and just as unworthy.

[rhombus]

Through our "drug program" we prop up V. Fox and the entire Mexican government and proxies in this country who are also enriched by the whole fiasco

Agreed. Wouldn't it make more sense to prop up social security or some other huge Gov't entitlement program with tax money derived from the sale of this obviously popular product?

[Blzbba]

"The conservative members of the court, with the exception of Scalia, sided with the rights of states. The liberal members of the court all sided with expanding Federal power under the 'interstate commerce' clause. That's pretty much as predictable as it gets, with the exception of Scalia

SCOTUS doesn't play checkers, it plays chess - try to keep up."



"Try to keep up"? This from a guy who literally reposted my points - that the conservatives sided with the states (and thus, the mary jane smokers) and the libs sided with the Fed?

no need to reply to something if you're not going to contribute anything new. Please try to keep up.

[SAJ]

No, but it does mean that the feds can (by fiat, not via the Constitution) regulate you and your corn. Crappy decision, even worse than Wickard in some respects.

[NJ_gent]

"the conservatives sided with the states (and thus, the mary jane smokers)"

The conservatives only sided with the 'mary jane smokers' in the sense that they happened to be the people standing in front of them. None of the dissenting decisions talk about the 'rights' of marijuana smokers to smoke their marijuana. What all of them discuss is Federal and state power, and the 'commerce' clause. While I may have misunderstood your post (for which I apologize), I'm seeing far too many put this in terms of marijuana smokers vs law and order. This case has nothing to do with that and everything to do with controlling the spread and expansion of Federal power. As usual, Thomas' opinion says it best:

"If Congress can regulate this under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually anything and the Federal Government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers…."

"To be sure, Congress declared that state policy would disrupt federal law enforcement. It believed the across-the-board ban essential to policing interstate drug trafficking. But as JUSTICE O.CONNOR points out, Congress presented no evidence in support of its conclusions, which are not so much findings of fact as assertions of power. Congress cannot define the scope of its own power merely by declaring the necessity of its enactments."[emph mine]

Absolutely on the money as usual, Justice Thomas.

[rhombus]

Absolutely on the money as usual, Justice Thomas.

Which is why the RATS were so frightened of him and mounted the Anita Hill nonsense.

[RockyMtnMan]

I must have missed the part where they explained that the illicit drug market is in fact a legitimate market. How can the government regulate a market that officially should not exist? They can arbitrarily decide what constitutes a legitimate course of business based on their idea of what a "market" is?

It shouldn't exist but does so we'll apply the law for a legitimate market to the illegitimate one. What a pant load of misinterpretation.

[bigsigh]

What I like is not only did we put those evil liberals in their place but also taught a lesson to some whining cancer patients. Another great supreme court decision.

[Blzbba]

"for which I apologize"


Apology accepted. We're on the same side of this argument, NJ, believe me.

[patriot_wes]

"Wouldn't it make more sense to prop up social security or some other huge Gov't entitlement program with tax money derived from the sale of this obviously popular product?"

This is so simple! therefore it doesn't stand a chance in hell of getting past our brilliant representatives.

Here is another simple idea: any Mexican illegals caught in US get a free plane ride to the southernmost end of the great country of Mexico and can start their walk back from there.

Secondly: every penny of welfare and/or medical support required by illegals or their offspring is debited against any foreign aid or trade incentives going to Mexico or whatever country the illegals might be from. Let them start paying the bills.

Let's start acting like a sovereign nation with our own interests being supported for once!

[Sandy]

Yakov Bok's definition of Federalism was dead before he was even born

That's rather beside the point. Maybe you weren't paying attention, but federalism had been slowly (although barely) coming back from the dead over the past 10 years. Many conservatives believed Bush when--before he was elected--he claimed that he supported the originalist idea of a Constitution which limits the national government to its enumerated powers. Quite obviously he lied--particularly in regard to the medical marijuana issue--a fact that became undeniable the moment his administration stood before the Court and argued in favor of the New Deal Constitution and a dead federalism.

You expect your enemies to stab you in the back, not your purported friends.