[Daveinyork]

Since when does the Constitution give the Feds the right to tell a state that it can’t legalize anything, if it decides to. We can’t argue against health care reform on a states rights platform, and say that the feds can make something illegal when a state legalizes it.

[halo66]

It has to do with strict drug enforcement guidelines in Federal contracts within the state of California. Basically...the feds may cancel or limit contracts if the state passes a pot law.

[publiusF27]

Since when does the Constitution give the Feds the right to tell a state that it can’t legalize anything, if it decides to.

Since Gonzalez vs Raich in 2005 on this particular issue.

I thought Justice Thomas got that one right in his dissent, but oh well... He said:

Respondents Diane Monson and Angel Raich use marijuana that has never been bought or sold, that has never crossed state lines, and that has had no demonstrable effect on the national market for marijuana. If Congress can regulate this under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually anything--and the Federal Government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers....If the majority is to be taken seriously, the Federal Government may now regulate quilting bees, clothes drives, and potluck suppers throughout the 50 States. This makes a mockery of Madison's assurance to the people of New York that the "powers delegated" to the Federal Government are "few and defined," while those of the States are "numerous and indefinite." The Federalist No. 45, at 313 (J. Madison).