Recreational marijuana legal in Colorado now!

So what do you think the federal government does about legalization since the states are technically not allowed to do this? Do they continue looking the other way as they have with medical marijuana? Do they stamp it out now? Do they just kind of half-do it and just stamp the groweries when they get to big (as they did to California recently?)
 
So what do you think the federal government does about legalization since the states are technically not allowed to do this?

Nominally they shouldn't be able to do anything. The states should be perfectly within their rights to revoke state laws against marijuana and not have state authorities prosecute offenders. I don't know how kosher it is for states to tax it regulate it though.
 
Nominally they shouldn't be able to do anything. The states should be perfectly within their rights to revoke state laws against marijuana and not have state authorities prosecute offenders. I don't know how kosher it is for states to tax it regulate it though.

Well, apparently it's legal somewhere else too.

Washington. My understanding of the problem is that the ban on marijuana is a federal law, which would supercede state law, regardless of whether or not it is voted legal by the state populace. This is the problem many states are finding with Medical Marijuana legislation. For the most part the DEA tends to overlook Medical Marijuana cardholders because what they do is too small-time to bother with, but occasionally the federal government does step in and enforce the law, as when the DEA shut down a number of groweries in the East Bay a year or two ago.
 
I *think* legalizing marijuana is also against international trade treaties, which is why it has never been legalized in the Netherlands, only decriminalized. There have been plans to tax it here, but those have been stopped by these international treaties. Do international treaties block state law in the US?
 
I've heard arguments that treaties can actually supersede the US Constitution itself, but reading the supremacy clause for myself it appears that treaties are more on par with regular federal laws. It does seem like it may be harder to argue that treaties (once ratified by the Senate; the house of representatives has no say) are unconstitutional than laws are though. The Federal government is only granted the authority to pass laws for certain specific purposes, but such limits are not placed on treaties.

US Constitution said:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.
 
Congress has power to pass statues that implement non self-executing treaties and can do things in those statues that Congress couldn't do with any of its other enumerated powers provided it does not violate the Constitution. Power to pass treaties is its own separate independent power. Acts of Congress are supreme law of the land only when pursuant to Constitution while treaties are supreme law of the land when made under the authority of the US. (Missouri v. Holland)

a. State laws that conflict with treaties are invalid.
b. Under the last in time rule: If there is a conflict between treaty and federal statue one adopted last in time controls.
c. Treaties are invalid if they conflict with the Constitution.
 
Yeah, somehow I hadn't really considered the treaty angle before. I guess that means that the war on drugs actually is Constitutional, although still unwise. It seems like the only way around this may be to withdraw from those various drug treaties.
 
If states can collect taxes on medical marijuana (and they do) then I don't see why they can't collect it outright. Do said treaties allow for medical use of pot?
 
Idiots!

don't call it recreational!

I and many other Americans need that to manage anger and to relieve stress...also my knees are shot...and my back and...god damn it I just hope you stoners don't anger the government with all your texting/smoking and driving....

I am both happy and angered...you should have to get a license like the rest of us responsible citizens

Do they stamp it out now? Do they just kind of half-do it and just stamp the groweries when they get to big (as they did to California recently?)

Yeah and drive up the price of weed...plus it did effect the gas...I mean they shut down all Clinics south of Irvine to San Diego so everyone south of Irvine drives 30 miles there to Santa Ana and then 30 miles back...yep it effects more then just social issues...its an economic issue....
 
The Gov said he would sign it as he is obligated to do within 30 days.

Congrats Colorado and Washington! Now celebrate responsibly and don't give legalization a bad name...
 
Yeah, somehow I hadn't really considered the treaty angle before. I guess that means that the war on drugs actually is Constitutional, although still unwise. It seems like the only way around this may be to withdraw from those various drug treaties.

Well, the problem is, they are not drug treaties, they are general trade treaties that have some "Thou shalt not do drugs" subclauses written in there deep down. Getting out of the whole treaty, or renegotiating it with everybody around the world is hard (at least for the Netherland ;) I guess if the US wanted to change the treaty it would happen a lot easier).
 
Back
Top Bottom