Posted on 07/08/2018 4:49:46 PM PDT by edwinland
Elizabeth Warren, meet Clarence Thomas.
Senator Warren, a Democrat of Massachusetts, was in the headlines recently for joining with Senator Cory Gardner, a Republican who represents Colorado, to introduce the Strengthening the Tenth Amendment Through Entrusting States Act. That legislation would, as Warren put it in a tweet, “let states, territories, & tribes decide for themselves how best to regulate marijuana — without federal interference.”
Justice Thomas is Warren’s natural ally on the issue. He wrote an emphatic dissent in the 2005 Supreme Court case Gonzalez v. Raich. Gonzalez was President George W. Bush’s attorney general Alberto Gonzalez, and Angel Raich is an Oakland, California woman who used locally grown marijuana for medical reasons.
The dissent by Thomas focused not on the advantages or disadvantages of marijuana use but on the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. That clause states, “The Congress shall have Power … To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States.”
The Thomas dissent begins: “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.”
(Excerpt) Read more at newbostonpost.com ...
A great line from a great Justice.
And a few years later Congress ‘regulated’ health care. And Justice Thomas was proven exactly correct.
that little fake-conservative prick Cory Gardner has been hell bent on promoting marijuana. He’s one of the many beneficiaries of massive pot money going to our elected officials at every level here in Colorado. Our local county commission is 100% bought off by pot money. The level of corruption rivals that when alcohol money during prohibition was used to buy government officials ...
No good will come from legalizing this stuff.
“No good will come from legalizing this stuff.”
I totally agree. The States should have laws against it. But since they did not delegate to anyone the general ability to regulate conduct wholly within their borders, it’s not a matter for the Federal government to decide one way or the other.
President Trump says he supports Cory Gardner’s legislation letting states decide =>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6M53XLBd54Y
Let the States manage it. 50 different solutions are better than one big Federal monster. Most states will opt for decriminalizing for users, with varying degrees of allowance for home growing and regulated sales. Some states will prohibit it. That fine. When States make mistakes, it will be much easier to change. This is the way almost everything should be done; at the State level.
Now, with respect to abortion, all the Dems oppose state rights and insist on the constutional right to an abortion that doesn’t exist for all States.
The Federal government can still be involved in drug regulation, but it should focus primarily on border interdiction and trafficking of C1 drugs and non-prescribed opioids.
There’s actually a big difference between Thomas and Warren on this issue.
Thomas, citing Constitution, TELLS the federal government that this is none of it’s business, and to back off.
Warren, ignoring Constitution, ASKS the federal government to back off, assuming that the federal government has the authority over this, unless federal legislation is passed to “permit” that to be delegated to the states.
Completely agree.
It does suck that fedgov is in a position to “grant” power to the states in this matter, which it usurped from them in the first place.
Even so, I am in favor of fedgov doing this across all areas where it doesn’t belong, such as education, health care, etc. Such legislation strengthens the states vis a vis fedgov. While it doesn’t strengthen the Tenth Amendment de jure, it does strengthen it in fact, IMO.
In the late 19th century, somehow America wasn’t all excited about marijuana, surely telling us that it was a miniscule problem. Alcohol had become a matter of controversy, leading to the failed Prohibition.
Alcohol should have also taught us the lesson that it’s the soul and the spirituality and the morality that matters. Not the substance. Unfortunately, it didn’t!! The evidence that such things matter is there in plain sight for anyone who visits an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting. But does the average virtue-signaling rightist care? Apparently not.
Really? Do you have anyone close to you who has substantial pain? My wife does, and now that “marijuana” is “legal” in California, she can openly buy CBD, one of the constituent chemicals present in marijuana, which is an excellent pain killer that does not have the deleterious side effects of opioids and opiates. There is a lot more to marijuana than toking up and getting high. On a lighter note, our daughter has a young, hiperkinetic Maltese Poodle. She has found that she can "even him out" with marijuana laced doggie treats. They don't let him drive, so it's o.k.
I have to assume that anyone who is still anti-cannabis at this point either has a personal financial interest at stake or is an irreconcilable Puritan.
On a public policy basis, on the basis of law, the arguments to end prohibition are overwhelming.
Marijuana extracts are now approved for epilepsy. I use non-THC CBD oil for back pain. And legalizing marijuana would go a long way to stop the police deprivations using the War On Drugs to illegally seize money and property with no proof of any illegal activity.
“On a public policy basis, on the basis of law, the arguments to end prohibition are overwhelming.”
Absolutely! And here in CA, because of the continuing “ban” on a Federal Basis, the “marijuana distributors” have to be on a cash only basis (to avoid IRS intervention I’ve been told), and have no place of business listed. Our daughter lives in downtown Oakland. When my wife needs some CBD, our daughter makes a phone call and literally in a matter of minutes a car shows up with two people ( I’m assuming one is for security since it’s a cash and carry business) and the transaction is completed. Where we live, the local town council is not allowing a dispensary to operate.
The really sad part of it is because of it’s connection with abuse, marijuana’s real benefits are mixed into the legislative process.
good post following a great article about the commerce clause and the Tenth Amendment.
The CBD didn’t help me, but 86.5% THC vape kills the pain very nicely. I don’t drive on it but I do use it after work and it is marvelous. Plus I no longer take the opioids.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.