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

To: Bella_Bru
I respect JimRob's opinion, but on the facts he's wrong. Section 8 of th US Constituion is very clear about what are defined as Congressional powers. BTW, JimRob doesn't support the legalization of drugs either. Many conservatives also believe the WoD`s can be made to operate more efficiently and effcetively. But to end the WoD would be akin to ending the "Wars" on murder, stealing, rape, child violence etc etc etc.............

Now for a few facts.

The Controlled Substances Act

The Controlled Substances Act (CSA), Title II of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, is the legal foundation of the government's fight against the abuse of drugs and other substances. This law is a consolidation of numerous laws regulating the manufacture and distribution of narcotics, stimulants, depressants, hallucinogens, anabolic steroids, and chemicals used in the illicit production of controlled substances.

The Controlled Substances Act =====================================

TOUBY v. UNITED STATES, 500 U.S. 160 (1991)

The Controlled Substances Act authorizes the Attorney General, upon compliance with specified procedures, to add new drugs to five "schedules" of controlled substances, the manufacture, possession, and distribution of which the Act regulates or prohibits. Because compliance with the Act's procedures resulted in lengthy delays, drug traffickers were able to develop and market "designer drugs" - which have pharmacological effects similar to, but chemical compositions slightly different from, scheduled substances - long before the Government was able to schedule them and initiate prosecutions. To combat this problem, Congress added 201(h) to the Act, creating an expedited procedure by which the Attorney General can schedule a substance on a temporary basis when doing so is "necessary to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety," and providing that a temporary scheduling order is not subject to judicial review. The Attorney General promulgated regulations delegating, inter alia, his temporary scheduling power to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), which subsequently temporarily designated the designer drug "Euphoria" as a schedule I controlled substance. While that temporary order was in effect, petitioners were indicted for manufacturing and conspiring to manufacture Euphoria. The District Court denied their motion to dismiss, rejecting their contentions that 201(h) unconstitutionally delegates legislative power to the Attorney General, and that the Attorney General improperly delegated his temporary scheduling authority to the DEA. The Court of Appeals affirmed petitioners' subsequent convictions.

TOUBY v. UNITED STATES, 500 U.S. 160 (1991)

151 posted on 02/07/2002 9:12:21 AM PST by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies ]


To: Reagan Man
Section 8 of th US Constituion is very clear about what are defined as Congressional powers.

Indeed it is, and it clearly does not give the federal government the power of prohibition. The only time the federal government legally wielded such a power was during the time period between the ratification of the Eighteenth and Twenty-First Amendments, and only with respect to one drug (alcohol).

159 posted on 02/07/2002 9:17:25 AM PST by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies ]

To: Reagan Man
I just posted that in response to Ol Sparky's call to JimRob to "clean up FR".

Speaking for myself, the drug war has not succeeded. I have never had a tough time finding the green when I wanted it.

162 posted on 02/07/2002 9:18:05 AM PST by Bella_Bru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies ]

To: Reagan Man
RE; your agitprop post #151

"Now for a few facts." LOL!

Have you no sense of irony whatsoever???

If Stalin had waved the Soviet Constitution in your face, would YOU have taken it at face value as a guarantee of rights?

And if not, why not??

I can assure you that Soviet prosecutors never lacked for 'legal' foundations to their malign operations.

NEVER post some lawyerly casuistry and expect to have it regarded as evidence for anything except the unquenchable thirst and insatiable appetite of these licensed cannibals.

222 posted on 02/07/2002 9:42:14 AM PST by headsonpikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | 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