Uncategorized

Federal Legal Precedence Dead?…or, Dixie’s Spirit Still Lives!

2 Comments

Oakland allows industrial-scale marijuana farms

Oakland’s City Council late Tuesday adopted regulations permitting industrial-scale marijuana farms, a plan that some small farmers argued would squeeze them out of the industry they helped to build.

It looks like the only argument in Oakland is whether or not the corporate dopers will crowd out the small-time family dopers. (I know that sounds weird, but there it is!)

I REALLY don’t get this one! (And no, I am not arguing here one way or the other about Bob Newland’s Favorite Issue. That’s a whole other discussion.)

As far as I know the Federal drug laws are still on the books, and are still (sort of?) being enforced…at least the DEA hasn’t been abolished yet, as far as I know.

SO…Arizona is sued by DoJ for having the unforgivable nerve to presume to pass a law on immigration that mirrors the Federal laws, and is slapped down for doing so. They are acting IN SUPPORT of the Federal legislation.

Meanwhile, Oakland, and other locations, are actively promoting the direct VIOLATION of Federal laws withing their jurisdiction, with no Federal action in response?

Can you say N-U-L-L-I-F-I-C-A-T-I-O-N? Wasn’t there a rather sharpish discussion on that topic from the 1830’s until 1865 when the issue was supposed to have been disposed of? If not, perhaps the spirit of J.C. Calhoun and the other proto-Confederates of his day is truly alive and well and lurking under a hempen shroud.

2 thoughts on “Federal Legal Precedence Dead?…or, Dixie’s Spirit Still Lives!”

  1. IANAL, but it would seem that the 10th Amendment pretty well lays out that the states get to decide how this stuff is enforced, whether it’s hemp or illegal immigration.

    The Constitution could be in serious jeopardy if this Arizona case gets any headway.

  2. If congress has the power to pass laws regulating drug traffic at all, the 10th Amendment would be moot in that case. One COULD argue in the face of over 100 years of precedent back to T.R.’s (1906) Pure Food and Drug Act that Congress did NOT have this power…but, given the current state of stare decisis, that argument has little firm legal ground to stand on.

    Anyway, I see nothing in the 10th Amendment that allows states to actively VIOLATE federal law, as it happening in California, where localities are actively promoting the cultivation, distribution, sale, and taxation of marijuana, which is CLEARLY in violation of federal drug trafficking laws, which have been repeatedly tested in court, and upheld.

    I concur that the DoJ’s suit against AZ would be constitutionally destructive if it is successful.

Comments are closed.