"Contrary to federal law and an international treaty, California has enacted laws declaring that certain persons have a right to use marijuana for medical purposes and has authorized those individuals to use, possess, distribute and cultivate marijuana without criminal sanction."
"The County brings this lawsuit because it believes California's medical marijuana laws are preempted under the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution (Article VI) because they conflict with a federal statute (the Controlled Substances Act) and an international treaty (the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs). Thus, the Country believes that it should not be required to implement California's preempted and therefore void medical marijuana laws."
Perhaps you can point out the differences to me between the U.S. Supreme Court's decisions in Brown v. Board of Ed. and Gonzales v. Raich and why the states had to comply with one (under threat with armed federal troops) but not the other.