Best
154 Comments
Post
  • #12
    !
    I would like to see the legal precedent that would be used to get Colorado to suspend a duly elected Constitutional amendment. The Supremacy Clause does not hold up because marijuana sales can't be considered to be a commerce sold between States. Thus, does not violate any Interstate Commerce regarding marijuana. There is no national price for marijuana, it's not traded on any market. And if marijuana is grown, sold and consumed in Colorado, then there is no precedent that would allow the Supremacy Clause to be valid -- as the courts have routinely sided with the Government if the product in question violates the Interstate Commerce Clause.

    Reading the Court's opinion of both Wicker and Raich, one can easily argue that the Colorado legalization effort is not similar enough to provide precedent. Further, in Raich, the leading opinion clearly states that Raich did not challenge the Constitutionality of CSA. If Colorado goes to court over this, I would almost guarantee that the CSA would be challenged on Constitutionality grounds.

    Furthermore, Colorado simply would exert their 10th Amendment protections which clearly outline that any responsibility not specifically granted to the Government are left to the States to decide. And with that, there is NOTHING in the Constitution which says the Feds can regulate mind altering substances -- especially not a plant.

    And another thing.. Federal law does not supersede State laws. If they did, the Feds would have shut down Medical Marijuana years ago, not to mention decriminalization efforts.

    I wish those who actually wrote the news had the ability to research claims to determine the validity of such claims... as opposed to just cherry-picking and re-writing stories from other websites.
  • #29
    !
    Thank you for taking the time to post this well-reasoned argument. I'd love to see more thoughtful responses like this, rather than the pitiful rants of uninformed reactionaries.
  • #72
    !
    @RFP, what fact-check said.:)

    Seriously, thank you for the information. I googled several of the things you mentioned in your comment and feel like I've learned some valuable things this evening. I love it when that happens.
  • #113
    !
    @Denizen_Kate -- Well I'm glad I could provide useful information. Thanks for taking the time to check up and read some of the associated law. Knowledge makes us all stronger!
  • R Load more replies

  • #10
    !
    Let the states do as they please. I doubt this will make the whole become pot heads. Besides Feds can still bust people for mailing it, or transporting it out of state. Personally I say make it legal everywhere. I would rather deal with pot heads than drunks any day.
  • #3
    !
    I'm a little torn here. On one hand I don't want liberals to get all drugged up and drive down a road and kill somebody. On the other hand, I'm tired of obama telling every state what they can and can't do. Either way this is a lose/lose situation.
  • #21
    !
    funny how you think;

    1. only liberals smoke pot. shows your inability to look at any subject objectively and throws every single analysis of yours into the junk pile...

    2. that people aren't driving stoned all the time now. do you have any realistic idea of how many people smoke pot now?
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • R Load more replies

  • #98
    !
    I find it interesting that so many who say the Federal Government should run so many aspects of our lives...

    ...then get mad when that same Federal Government says "No" to smoking pot.
  • #104
    !
    @CanisCanemEdit - who says it's the same people? I don't think it is... I know it isn't the same people. This issue is of concern to people of all political persuasions... As someone already pointed out, many cops, judges, and prosecutors also oppose prohibition. Are they all liberals too? The right to consume intoxicating substances is about liberty. If the gov't is trying to prevent people from getting intoxicated, why haven't we outlawed everything that gets a person high?

    Anslinger is dead... it is time to let his erroneous ideology die too.
  • #105
    !
    @DogLady_1 - My point was about posters here on Politix. There are many that support to the death Obamacare, TSA over-reach and other big government policies that take authority away from the individual states on the grounds that the Federal Government knows better.

    Many of the same people are upset now that the Federal Government has said "No" to pot.

    (It doesn't effect me, it grows wild here on the farm.)
  • #109
    !
    @CanisCanemEdit First off, Obamacare is a mainly private sector solution, a 'big govt' solution would have been medicare for all and single payer. Secondly, those who support the TSA, DEA, homeland security, our HUGE defense budget, are the same people who support cannabis prohibition, federal gay marriage bans, and federal abortion bans. These are also the people that cry about big govt policies.
  • #111
    !
    @CanisCanemEdit

    And those people that want gay marriage illegal, and their religious views respected at the expense of others views.... What of them
  • R Load more replies

  • #26
    !
    No they them selfs should make it legal bc it's a harmless plant that has zero ill affects and the money that could come from taxing weed would be astronomical and it would be a Hugh boost in the economy bc all of the business that come along with weed it would number in the millions along with the unemployment rate it would drop possible to zero so its very stupid not to take advantage of that
  • #8
    !
    This is what the civil war was originally about, States Rights. If the voters of those states decide to make something legal, or illegal, the federal government should allow them to do so. Obama was all about saying the majority of people have sp
  • #7
    !
    no they should let it become legal. think of the economic boom it will bring to Mexico and Central America. all those smugglers bringing in all that dope. it's a very profitable business model .
  • #11
    !
    What an ignorant response. If they legalize it and regulate it within these states then you would buy it as you would alcohol. You would even be allowed to grow it yourself. You don't see people smuggling alcohol across the border do you?
  • #20
    !
    We've had medical marijuana in Colorado 10 years and that product is locally grown - and the growers boast of the superior quality of their weed. In fact, American pot is thought to be the best in the world by many, including the DEA and High Times.

    It's not likely central American cartels could compete with our weed.
  • #23
    !
    pretty illogical. that is how it is now. if it is legal there would be no reason to get it from out of the country.

    you didn't really think thatt through, did you?
  • R Load more replies

  • #4
    !
    There is only one reason to keep marijuana illegal and it is a very bad reason: so that law enforcement persons who have become used to making a living tracking it down can keep making a living. I'm glad to say not all law enforcement mindlessly clings to obviously failed policies: L.E.A.P.(Law Enforcement Against Prohibition) has a lot of good things to say about why Prohibition should end. http://www.leap.cc/
  • #45
    !
    No. I don't. But Obama and his cronies and Supreme Court judges will do whatever they need to do to 1) win people over or 2) keep more money in politicians pockets.
  • #30
    !
    should be legal,,cigaretts are worse and also alcohol they , causes more deaths and accidents,marijuana should be legal, it is good for many health issues an manufacturing, like rope etc
  • #34
    !
    Not one death ever directly attributed to the consumption of Marijuana in 5,000 years, according to the U.S. Justice Department.
  • #28
    !
    End the witch hunt and legalize already. The prohibition of marijuana while alcohol remains legal and a socially acceptable recreational drug is quite possibly the most hypocritical occurance in human history.
  • #22
    !
    The majority of adults polled say legalize marijuana by a wide margin in America. Obama has nothing to lose since he can't run again. He can champion gay rights, minority rights, women's rights, animal rights, every other right in the sun. It's about time an American President had the will to say that this is what the majority wants and advocate legalization. And just think. It would drive the GOP back against the wall again against what the majority wants if they refuse to legalize. It's win win for Obama to step up for pot.
  • #73
    !
    Agreed. People should remember the last time we had a federal prohibition against a popular recreational drug (alcohol). We ended up with organized crime and income taxes. Just sayin' . . .
  • #17
    !
    Congress is not going to willingly let go of power, in any way shape or form. They need that power to collect political capital. The capital they then use to buy yet another term in office. It's called political survival.
  • #15
    !
    Well of course. Why wouldn't the feds waste even more money trying to regulate something they have never been able to stop. Oh wait!! They'd rather the Cartels make the money. My bad.
  • #9
    !
    Obama was all about saying the majority of people have spoken when it came to his mandate. Now it is time for him to stand up for the people's majority, and tell the federal government to support the will of the people.
  • #13
    !
    Yeah, he's had a bizarre policy on this, saying he would leave it to the states then leaving a rabid Prohibitionist in charge of the DEA and letting the Justice Department go after those who used state laws to start businesses. I realize he isn't a dictator and cannot tell either department what to do but he can make strong recommendations. I have no idea what his real stance on this will be these next four years. Guess Washington will find out.
  • #49
    !
    @Zazziness I am afraid it will end up being just a hot button issue that he used to get elected. I base that on his as of yet silence on the matter at the federal level. Plus you can look at it from a conspiracy stand point, that it was only on the ballot in those states to draw out more liberal leaning voters. That way he has more base out to vote, since without that extra vote they would have gone to Romney. If the latter is true, I think he will have pissed a lot of voters off who supported him.
  • #53
    !
    @Big-R He already did that on this issue when Eric Holder and the DEA attacked Colorado and California. It's such a rough political issue because even though I am sure 98% of Congress knows darn well it would be good to end Prohibition, few politicians want to be known as the dope-advocate. They're all afraid it won't do their career any good. I think the legalization efforts truly are grass roots. The People are tired of Prohibition.
  • #55
    !
    @Zazziness Agreed, I think from this point on there will be even more grass root efforts for all causes. Once the majority of people get behind the issue, the politicians will have to do the right thing. If they don't, they will never win another election. Which would be a good thing. I don't know about you, but I believe in term limits at all levels. They would be forced to do the will of the people versus the will of the lobbyist's. No more getting the seat, then just keeping 51% of the people happy.
  • #80
    !
    @Zazziness well politicians are always about themselves and not about the people. I think the current state of our two houses are examples if that. They exclude themselves from our laws, profit from inside knowledge on regulations and in general screw the American people. Getting them to do anything other than amass a "war chest" to take with them upon retirement will never happen. Unless they personally get a cut of our tax dollars. That's is my opinion.
  • R Load more replies

  • #150
    !
    The Feds have no right to control the states authority in this issue. The states are only limited in their authority by the Constitution and as there is no conflict with the Constitution as to it being legal or not; states have the right to decided whether it be legal or not. Which means the people of each state have the right to chose by way of the vote.
  • R Load more comments...
Post