- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Oklahoma, Nebraska Ask U.S. Supreme Court To Overturn Colorado Marijuana Law
Posted on 12/20/14 at 10:33 am to Bestbank Tiger
Posted on 12/20/14 at 10:33 am to Bestbank Tiger
quote:
Someone who uses marijuana is not violating any state law, so the state doesn't have the jurisdiction to prosecute. If the feds don't like Colorado legalizing marijuana, they can send the DEA in to arrest people on federal charges. But state courts have no power because no state law is being violated.
the argument is that by legalizing marijuana, the state is now in conflict with federal law
i'm not an expert in this area of con law, but i believe to make that argument, you have to show the federal government has established itself as the regulatory body in this area. basically federal law preempts state law, so state law cannot violate federal law.
OK/NE's arguments are weak for 2 reasons
1. drug prosecutions are the domain of the states, always have been, and will continue to do so regardless of what Colorado does. there is a regulatory framework for drugs in the federal system, but it is not the first line of defense in the "war on drugs". states handle the super majority of cases involving drugs.
2. Colorado is basically removing a law. it's not adding a law that comes into conflict with federal law. OK/NE are arguing that by removing a law (or refusing to enforce a law) that comes into an area that the feds may also regulate, the state at issue is violating the constitution by its inaction. not only is that a scary argument, any politician from OK/NE that claims to be for states rights that supports this suit is basically the definition of hypocrisy.
Posted on 12/20/14 at 10:47 am to SlowFlowPro
This seems to highlight the difference in legalization and decriminalization.
You can make the argument that legalization and taxation makes the state a business partner in the drug industry.
You can make the argument that legalization and taxation makes the state a business partner in the drug industry.
Posted on 12/20/14 at 1:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
any politician from OK/NE that claims to be for states rights that supports this suit is basically the definition of hypocrisy.
Exactly.
Posted on 12/20/14 at 11:27 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
that's my thing. if the states can't have their own drug laws, then any law in "conflict" with federal drug law would become invalidated. that would create chaos and leave the feds as the de facto drug prosecutor, which would implode their system.
also, i read an article yesterday that went through this. the DOJ said they're not going to prosecute these crimes and the USSC can't force the federal or state governments to execute their laws. so basically even if the USSC said this scheme was illegal, the only thing that would really become illegal is the regulations of weed. that would leave Colorado with legal, unregulated weed.
quote:
the argument is that by legalizing marijuana, the state is now in conflict with federal law
i'm not an expert in this area of con law, but i believe to make that argument, you have to show the federal government has established itself as the regulatory body in this area. basically federal law preempts state law, so state law cannot violate federal law.
OK/NE's arguments are weak for 2 reasons
1. drug prosecutions are the domain of the states, always have been, and will continue to do so regardless of what Colorado does. there is a regulatory framework for drugs in the federal system, but it is not the first line of defense in the "war on drugs". states handle the super majority of cases involving drugs.
2. Colorado is basically removing a law. it's not adding a law that comes into conflict with federal law. OK/NE are arguing that by removing a law (or refusing to enforce a law) that comes into an area that the feds may also regulate, the state at issue is violating the constitution by its inaction. not only is that a scary argument, any politician from OK/NE that claims to be for states rights that supports this suit is basically the definition of hypocrisy.
10/10. Would read again.
SFP, I fully believe that a when they lose this case, we're going to eventually see bordering states around Colorado and Washington legalize or at least decriminalize weed. It's all or nothing here for drug warriors. But damn, this may be the most shortsighted move I've seen in a while in opposition to legalization efforts.
Popular
Back to top
![logo](https://images.tigerdroppings.com/images/layout/TDIcon.jpg)