Nice dodge in changing the subject. A tactic which I notice you attempted to earlier with another Freeper.
-------
And no, it is NOT Constitutional for the feds to regulate anything that crosses the border. They have only a concurrent jurisdiction with the state to collect taxes at the points of entry.
Everything else is under the purview of the States as per the 10th Amendment.
[I]f the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them.
Samuel Adams (under the pseudonym "Candidus") in the Boston Gazette, 1772
--------
Since you feel free to engage in the game of 'assumption' I'll play along and assume from your reply that indeed you do not care about the Constitution.
“’Scuse me, but since their IS NO Constitutional authority for the federal government to regulate or prohibit ‘drugs’ of any kind.....”
My response dealt with just how far that “IS NO” extended in your opinion.
“And no, it is NOT Constitutional for the feds to regulate anything that crosses the border. They have only a concurrent jurisdiction with the state to collect taxes at the points of entry.”
The states, the federal government and the courts disagree with you and that is the reality we live with. Visas, passports and tariffs are regulations on the border and accepted as constitutional by the courts.
Thanks for the Sam Adams quote. I'm part of the “public” as was Sam. And like him I have to obey laws I may not agree with.
“’ I'll play along and assume from your reply that indeed you do not care about the Constitution.”
I can quote too, if not verbatim, ‘The Constitution is not a suicide pact’.