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

To: MamaTexan
“Oh, that's right, you totally ignored it”

Go to court because some DEA agent found a bale of weed in your trunk and try that argument out on the judge. You don't need a lawyer, just explain that the fed law is unconstitutional and Marshall said so. Be sure and explain too that “Unconstitutional acts have NO FORCE in law.”

Of course I ignored it. But who knows? Maybe all the drug convictions under fed law will be overturned and the prisoners set free because Marshall said so.

Didn't the Raich decision uphold the CC in the case of pot in Cal.?

67 posted on 10/21/2012 6:47:23 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]


To: count-your-change
Didn't the Raich decision uphold the CC in the case of pot in Cal.?

Yes, they did.

The US Supreme Court also 'found' in Wickard v. Filburn that a man couldn't grow his own wheat on his own land for his and his own family's consumption.

Do you agree with that too?

68 posted on 10/21/2012 7:22:54 PM PDT by MamaTexan (I am a Person as Created by the Laws of Nature, not a person as created by the laws of Man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | 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