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

To: freedomfiter2

No, the Commerce Clause is why ALL marijuana is illegal, whether it crosses State lines or not. That’s the point. Under Gonzales v. Raich, even non-interstate commerce can be regulated under the Commerce Clause. And that make the Commerce Clause the bad mofo that it is. It’s a virtual catch-all for anything the Feds want to do.


48 posted on 12/14/2011 4:57:25 AM PST by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]


To: Wolfie
No, the Commerce Clause is why ALL marijuana is illegal, whether it crosses State lines or not. That’s the point. Under Gonzales v. Raich, even non-interstate commerce can be regulated under the Commerce Clause. And that make the Commerce Clause the bad mofo that it is. It’s a virtual catch-all for anything the Feds want to do.

The "substantial effect doctrine" is not the Commerce Clause.

Once you understand that, you understand the Big Lie.

50 posted on 12/14/2011 5:03:18 AM PST by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]

To: Wolfie

No, the Commerce Clause is why ALL marijuana is illegal, whether it crosses State lines or not.

Under that understanding of the constitution, the federal government has total control of everything that has a physical presence. That can’t be right.


131 posted on 12/14/2011 3:59:54 PM PST by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | 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