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 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

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

by Steve Visser, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

David Clark looks pretty normal.  His smile is soft, his eyes are friendly, his voice is measured and his goatee is trimmed.

He may be a radical but he certainly isn’t wide-eyed.

The Sugar Hill lawyer is the Georgia face of a growing national movement to make marijuana legal.  And if he can’t make it legal, then at least wants it viewed as no worse than breaking the speed limit. Continue Reading

by Wyatt Buchanan, SF Chronicle Staff Writer

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Tuesday that the time is right to debate legalizing marijuana for recreational use in California.

The governor’s comments were made as support grows nationwide for relaxing pot laws and only days after a poll found that for the first time a majority of California voters back legal marijuana. Also, a San Francisco legislator has proposed regulating and taxing marijuana to bring the state as much as $1.3 billion a year in extra revenue.

Schwarzenegger was cautious when answering a reporter’s question Tuesday about whether the state should regulate and tax the substance, saying it is not time to go that far.

But, he said: “I think it’s time for debate. I think all of those ideas of creating extra revenues - I’m always for an open debate on it.”

The governor said California should look to the experiences of other nations around the world in relaxing laws on marijuana.

Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, has introduced a bill to regulate marijuana like alcohol, with people over 21 years old allowed to grow, buy, sell and possess cannabis - all of which are barred by federal law.

California voters in 1996 legalized marijuana for medical use with permission from a physician.

Ammiano said he was pleased the governor is “open-minded” on the issue and added that he was sure the two could “hash it out.”

Under Ammiano’s proposal, the state would impose a $50-an-ounce levy on sales of marijuana, which would boost state revenues by about $1.3 billion a year, according to an analysis by the State Board of Equalization. Betty Yee of San Francisco, who chairs the Board of Equalization, supports the measure.

“This has never just been about money,” said Ammiano, who has long supported reforming marijuana laws. “It’s also about the failure of the war on drugs and implementing a more enlightened policy. I’ve always anticipated that there could be a perfect storm of political will and public support, and obviously the federal policies are leaning more toward states’ rights.”

CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE

by Anthony Gregory, LewRockwell.com

The following is based on a talk given at the Free State Project’s Liberty Forum in Nashua, New Hampshire, on Friday, March 6, 2009.

The Tenth Amendment says “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.” This effectively means that if the Constitution does not grant the power to the federal government over something, then it is for the states and people to decide. Some people here would say this is the most important amendment. If the federal government obeyed it, the entire drug war as we know it would be impossible. Continue Reading