just legalize the stuff already.
So, what, can they smoke weed in MI or the opposite?
Very interesting. Thanks for posting. HOORAY Judge Mark Somers!
Hmmm, if it didn’t cross state lines, then what does the federal ....... oh, I forgot, the Constitution was obliterated about 70 years ago. My bad.
“marijuana, cocaine and LSD, are considered to be the most addictive”
Stoopid statement, as far as pot and LSD are concerned! Not addictive at all. Coke? Don’t know. No experience with it.
“George Soros Agenda for Drug Legalization, Death, and Welfare”
http://www.fmr.no/george-soros-agenda-for-drug-legalization-death-and-welfare.78404-10285.html
Apparently Judge Mark Somers has not gotten the message that we are ignoring the Federal Government’s own cronies arrogant self-serving assignment of the “limits” (or total lack there of) of their own power.
The Federal Governments own self-appointed cronies in black robes being unbound by the limits of the Federal Constitution 6 years ago, and thus able to out law the intrastate existence and consumption of a plant.
The case was called Gonzales v. Raich, and its out come is being openly ignored by at least 15 states. If theses states are successful in their nullification efforts it will pave the way towards reversing a great many other intrastate Federal tyranny’s that have developed over the last 100 years.
The simple truth is the Federal Government has no business in intrastate affairs.
This is not really about the medical use of marijuana. This is about federalism and the minute liberals figure that out will be the same moment many of them start abandoning this cause in favor of centralized arbitrary power.
Marijuana to one side, this judge needs to be put out of office for supporting illegitimate federal supremacy over State laws.
While federal supremacy *does* exist, it should only do so for constitutional authority, not the bizarre extrapolations used in past. For example:
The federal government has specific authority to regulate “interstate commerce”. But this has been unconstitutionally expanded to also mean “INTRA-state commerce.” Which means ALL commerce in the US is under federal authority in their lights, which is unconstitutional and wrong.
While federal courts may permit this grotesque enlargement of federal powers, State courts and State judges should make it a point to stand up for the constitutional rights of their State, even if they know that their decisions will eventually be overturned in federal court.
But in this case, this judge not only snubs his State government, but he is punishing this citizen of his State, even though he is in general compliance with state law.
So even though this is a federal and State argument, the judge is using this citizen as a pawn in his whimsical game. Of course, the worst abuse will come with sentencing, and I’ll suggest right now that this judge will “stand on whimsical principle”, to inflict the maximum punishment on the defendant.
More than enough reason for this judge to be dismissed from the bench.
Under what Constitutional authority does the Controlled Substances Act even exist in the first place?