When a state ‘nullifies’ a federal law, it is proclaiming that the law in question is void and inoperative, or ‘non-effective,’ within the boundaries of that state; or, in other words, not a law as far as that state is concerned.

While the media of late tends to focus on the new crop of states resisting DC with legislation on firearms and health care, they almost always miss, or ignore, what I consider to be some of the greatest and most effective state resistance to federal power - marijuana activism. Continue Reading

by Michael Boldin

My home state of California usually interacts with the federal government by genuflecting.  But, on a few issues - very few, that is - they’ve got plenty of backbone.

Most notably, marijuana.

Last week, the California State Senate passed Senate Joint Resolution 14 (SJR14), calling on the federal government to end their “interference in state medical marijuana laws.”  If passed by the Assembly, it will be sent on to Congress and the White House as an official position of the California legislature.

THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE CLAUSE

Under the Constitution of the United States, the federal government is authorized to exercise only those powers which have been delegated to it by the People.   This is affirmed by the ratification of the 10th Amendment, which states, ”The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

The federal government has often taken the position that it can still wage its “war on marijuana” under the “Interstate Commerce Clause” in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.  But, some experts see this kind of explanation as quite a stretch.

Most importantly, the Interstate Commerce Clause, as understood by the founders, was meant to empower the federal government to regulate trade among the states.  One of the chief concerns this addressed was preventing States from imposing restrictive taxes on goods coming from other states.

The Founders, however, made it quite clear that this would not authorize the government to take over fields like agriculture.  Clearly, this hasn’t stopped today’s politicians and judges from turning that original meaning nearly upside down.

FIREARMS TOO

While the stand off on state marijuana laws has been going on for over a decade, firearms is a new front in the Commerce Clause debate.

This year, both Montana and Tennesse passed a “Firearms Freedom Act” taking the position that guns manufactured in state, sold in state, and kept in state - would not be subject to federal laws and regulations under the Commerce Clause.

So far, the only response has been a sternly-written letter from the assistant director of the ATF stating his position that federal law supercedes state law - and the federal government intends to continue its current regulations.

A coalition of the Montana Sports Shooting Association and the 2nd Amendment Foundation is planning a court challenge “to the federal government’s insistence it will regulate those items.”

LEAVE IT TO THE STATES

According to Paul Armentano, deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), this is an issue that should be left up to the states.  He said, “The federal raids on medicinal marijuana providers have dissipated since Eric Holder was sworn in.  That said, the DEA has continued to be involved in a handful of raids in California — each time in cases that appeared to have been solely state matters (e.g., providers were alleged to be involved in state tax disputes or in violation of local ordinances), particularly based on the fact that federal charges were never filed.  If the Obama administration is really serious about leaving this issue solely up to state governments — as it should be — then the federal DEA ought to be leaving the voters of the thirteen states that have enacted medical marijuana policies alone.”

PROMISES MADE, PROMISES BROKEN?

As more states have passed medical marijuana laws, it’s become increasingly difficult and costly for the federal government to enforce its laws.  The Obama Administration has promised to end interference in state medical marijuana programs, but numerous federal raids since January have California lawmakers concerned.

SJR14 Sponsor Senator Mark Leno said that, “Patients and providers in California remain at risk of arrest and prosecution by federal law enforcement and legally established medical marijuana cooperatives continue to be the subjects of federal raids.”

In August, for example, federal agents conducted multiple raids on medical marijuana providers. On August 12, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Internal Revenue Service, and local police carried out a paramilitary-style raid on a medical marijuana provider in Los Angeles.

The reason given?  The government claimed that the raided facility had “failed to submit state sales tax revenues.”

Where the Constitution permits federal agencies to enforce state tax code violations, I’ll never know.

A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC?

Supporters say that the reduction of raids under the Obama administration is a good thing.  But, according to noted Constitutional historian Kevin Gutzman, leaving the fate of such issues to the decision of one sitting president or another is a dangerous precedent.

“Attorney General Holder’s decision to halt the long-standing federal policy of prosecuting medical marijuana distributors is a welcome development,” said Gutzman. “However, so long as the Federal Government does not recognize the states’ Tenth Amendment right to decide the issue of medical marijuana, a return of the bad old days when patients suffering crippling pain were denied this medical treatment is always one election away.”

In other words, any society that rests the fate of its liberty on the “goodness” or “badness” of its leaders is in serious trouble.

“That,” said Gutzman, “is the difference between a democracy and a constitutional republic.”

Copyright © 2009 by TenthAmendmentCenter.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

• Add to iTunes

Paul Armentano, Deputy Director of NORML - the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws discusses the unconstitutional nature of the war on marijuana, the history of marijuana prohibition in the U.S., the commerce clause as a federal excuse to regulate and prohibit various activities, 13 states that are directly resisting unconstitutional federal laws, a rare 10th amendment victory in the Supreme Court, the growth of taxes on marijuana into outright federal control and prohibition, a state-level strategy to rein in the federal government, and his new book, Marijuana is Safer - So Why are We Driving People to Drink?

Mentioned in this Show:

NORML

LewRockwell.com

AlterNet.org

The Hill

Marijuana is Safer

by Paul Armentano, NORML Deputy Director

Massachusetts Democrat Barney Frank, along with over a dozen cosponsors, reintroduced legislation in Congress to strengthen legal protections for state-authorized medical marijuana patients.

The bill, entitled the Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act of 2009, seeks to amend the discrepancy between federal law and the laws of over a dozen states that have enacted regulations governing the therapeutic use of cannabis.

Thirteen states – Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington – have enacted laws prohibiting medical marijuana patients from state prosecution. 

Passage of the the Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act would ensure that medical cannabis patients or providers who are compliant with state law, such as Charles Lynch (who was sentenced in federal court), would no longer have to fear arrest or prosecution from federal law enforcement agencies.

Previous versions of the Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act were introduced in both the 108th and 109th Congress, but failed to receive a public hearing or a committee vote.

While campaigning for the presidency, Barack Obama promised not to use Justice Department resources “to try and circumvent state (medical marijuana) laws” — a pledge that has been repeated in recent months by US Attorney General Eric Holder.

Nevertheless, agents from the US Drug Enforcement Administration have continued to target medical marijuana providers in states that allow for the drug’s use, and federal prosecutors have continued to bring federal anti-drug charges against defendants who were acting in accordance with their state’s cannabis laws.

It is time that we allowed our unique federalist system to work the way it was intended. Patients and their state representatives should have the authority to enact laws permitting the medical use of cannabis — free from federal interference.

Please write your members of Congress today and tell them to stop targeting and prosecuting medical marijuana patients and providers.

CLICK HERE TO TAKE ACTION TODAY

by Rep. Ron Paul

Last week, another bill was passed and signed into law that takes more of our freedoms and violates the Constitution of the United States.

It was, of course, done for the sake of the children, and in the name of the health of the citizenry.  It’s always the case that when your liberty is seized, it is seized for your own good.  Such is the condescension of Washington.

The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act will give sweeping new powers over tobacco to the FDA.  It will require everyone engaged in manufacturing, preparing, compounding, or processing tobacco to register with the FDA and be subjected to FDA inspections, which is yet another violation of the Fourth Amendment.  It violates the First Amendment by allowing the FDA to restrict tobacco advertising in multiple ways, as well as an outright ban on advertising any cigarettes as light, mild or low-tar.

The FDA will have the power of pre-market reviews of all new tobacco products, and will impose new user fees, meaning taxes, on manufacturers and importers of tobacco products.  It will even regulate the amount of nicotine in cigarettes.

My objections to the bill are not an endorsement of tobacco.  As a physician I understand the adverse health effects of this bad habit.  And that is exactly how smoking should be treated – as a bad habit and a personal choice.  The way to combat poor choices is through education and information.

Other than ensuring that tobacco companies do not engage in force or fraud to market their products, the federal government needs to stay out of the health habits of free people.  Regulations for children should be at the state level.

Unfortunately, government is using its already overly intrusive financial and regulatory roles in healthcare to establish a justifiable interest in intervening in your personal lifestyle choices as well.  We all need to anticipate the level of health freedom that will remain once government manages all health care in this country.

Actions in Congress such as this tobacco bill are especially disconcerting after we thought we were beginning to see some progress in drawing down the wrong-headed and failed war on drugs.  A majority of Americans now think marijuana should be legal, taxed and regulated, according to a recent Zogby poll and over 70 percent are in favor of allowing medicinal use of marijuana.

Bills like this take us down exactly the wrong path.  Instead of gaining more freedom with marijuana, we are moving closer to prohibiting tobacco.  Our prisons are already bursting with non-violent drug offenders.  How long will it be before a black market in tobacco fills the prisons with non-violent cigarette smokers?

Hemp and tobacco were staple crops for our founding fathers when our country was new.  It is baffling to see how far removed from real freedom this country has become since then.  Hemp, even for industrial uses, of which there are many, is illegal to grow at all.

Now tobacco will have more layers of bureaucracy and interference piled on top of it.  In this economy it is extremely upsetting to see this additional squeeze put on an entire industry.   One has to wonder how many smaller farmers will be forced out of business because of this bill.

Ron Paul is a republican member of Congress from Texas.

by Gavin Dahl, Boise Weekly

The Worldwide Marijuana March drew more than 300 demonstrators to downtown Boise on Saturday, May 2. Offering peace signs and garnering many supportive car honks, the marchers moved slowly under scattered showers along Capitol Boulevard to the front lawn of the Idaho Legislature.

Speakers addressed the mass on the grass under the watch of a Capitol Annex camera and a few security guards. Boise police did not engage the pungent assembly. Continue Reading

by RJ Harris

The federal government’s Constitutional authority to regulate drugs extends only so far as to prevent the movement of drugs across any state or federal border.

The war on drugs is not about drugs, it is about state sovereignty. Once the federal government gets us to concede the principle that the states cannot be trusted with their own sovereignty– to do what is right –then, on principle, the federal government will gain the ability to legislate other things against our sovereignty as well.

If we agree with the premise that Oklahoma cannot determine which drugs to allow its citizens to use and which ones not to let them use, then we have just conceded to allow the federal government to tell Oklahomans who they can and cannot marry, what they can and cannot eat, who they can and cannot associate with and so on.

I challenge you to re-read the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution wherein you will find that Oklahoma retained all sovereignty not delegated to the Congress through the Constitution.

While the federal government can control what goods enter the stream of interstate commerce, I do not agree that we Oklahoman’s should allow ourselves to be tricked into ceding one ounce of our liberty and sovereignty under the false premise that we cannot be trusted to regulate ourselves.

I would rather retain the right of our state to handle the drug issue, as well as other social issues, than accept on principle that we cannot regulate ourselves and that we therefore must accept other forms of social legislation from the federal government.

RJ Harris [send him email] is an entrepreneur, a law student, and a candidate for Congress in Oklahoma’s 4th Congressional District. Visit his website at www.rjharris2010.com.

from the Delaware Sussex Countian

Delawareans afflicted with a variety of chronic and painful conditions would be able to legally use medical marijuana to ease their suffering under a bill now under consideration in the Delaware State Senate.

Sen. Margaret Rose Henry (D-Wilmington East), said her bill isn’t an outright decriminalization of marijuana and is aimed at balancing compassion for the sick with maintaining tight controls on access and the amount of marijuana a person can have.

“Modern science shows us that marijuana can have beneficial effects for people suffering from a number of conditions including cancer, multiple sclerosis, glaucoma and HIV-AIDS,” Henry said. “While we don’t want to encourage the use of marijuana as a recreational drug, it makes no sense at all to deny the comfort it can give to people suffering from truly debilitating and painful diseases.”

If passed, Henry’s bill would:

• Limit patients to six ounces of marijuana a month.
• Require patients, people designated as caregivers and personnel at the “Compassion Care Centers” where pot could be distributed to have state issued ID cards authorizing their ability to access marijuana. The non-profit centers could not be operated within 500 feet of an existing public or private school.
• Require that marijuana be cultivated in enclosed, locked facilities with security systems to prevent theft.
• Ban employers from firing an employee receiving medical marijuana if they fail a drug screening. However, employees could be fired for working under the influence of marijuana.
• Prohibit the use of marijuana in public places, on public transportation, in schools and in prison.

Dr. John Goodill, chief of pain and palliative medicine at Christiana Care, said he supports Henry’s bill because it’s based on a proven model that’s produced good results for patients.

“This bill follows a model that has worked well in other states to date,” Goodill said.  “I think the medical evidence is compelling enough to add it to the list of options for relieving suffering in people living with serious illness and chronic pain.”

Joe Scarborough of Wilmington has used marijuana to ease the side effects of the drugs he takes to combat the effects of AIDS and to ease the pain in his leg and foot from nerve damage caused when a cancerous tumor was removed from his back. He praised Henry for taking on the issue and focusing it on using marijuana for medicinal purposes, instead of pushing for options, such as blanket decriminalization.

“Maybe, in a perfect world, you’d discuss total decriminalization, but I think Sen. Henry’s approach – just focusing on the people who can be helped by medical marijuana – is the right one,” Scarborough said. “I can tell you that, in my case, smoking marijuana has helped with the pain and nausea associated with the drugs I take for AIDS as well as chemotherapy and it has helped with pain caused by my nerve damage.”

by Chris Boardman, ABC-6 Rhode Island

The House today voted 63 to 5 to approve legislation to allow the creation of compassion centers to dispense marijuana to patients in the state’s medical marijuana program.

If the legislation (2009-H 5359A), which is sponsored by Rep. Thomas C. Slater (D-Dist. 10, Providence), is enacted, Rhode Island would join California and New Mexico as the only states that allow medical marijuana dispensaries. Continue Reading

In a recent interview on Air America Radio, Ron Paul took a strong stand in support of the Constitution and State Sovereignty - by stating that laws and regulations of Marijuana should be on a state level.

“If California wants to legalize it, let ‘em legalize it,” Paul told host Richard Greene on Air America’s “Hollywood CLOUT!” program. Continue Reading