I believe that federal law still stands that ANY possession of marijuana, other than than for medical use, is illegal.
Medical Marijuana is advancing in Illinois. Check out the latest story from NY Times: SPRINGFIELD, Ill. — The... Read More »
Kansas appeals court addresses medical marijuana issue for travelers March 15. By TONY RIZZO. The Kansas City Star.... Read More »
Foxborough Needs to Establish Medical Marijuana District Following AG's Ruling “Unless somebody can articulate something specific I think... Read More »
why does the federal government get to choose whats best for us? if we want something, should we not be able to have it, regardless if the government thinks its bad for us? im not a smoker myself. but we should have a right to be one if we want to.
Yes.
Numerous states (including my own, Colorado) have decriminalized medical marijuana. However, you’re still violating federal law. As a matter of practice, though, the FBI doesn’t seem to be bothering too much with prosecuting it: a couple of months ago, the Obama administration instructed the Department of Justice to lay off prosecution of medical marijuana users.
You are correct on that, then again since some cities in California don’t enforce the State law, they will ignore the Federal Law also.
There is really no perfect answer here. There have been numerous Supreme Court cases involving federal vs. state law, with varying results. The Constitution says on the matter:
Article. VI.
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, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Key phrase here is “Laws… made in Pursuance of…” This means that, technically, the California law would be superseded by federal law. Another problem would be the Commerce Clause, which gives Congress the authority to regulate interstate commerce.
You might ask how interstate commerce applies here. Well, in Gonzales v. Raich (2005) the Supreme Court decided that Congress may ban the use of marijuana even where states approve its use for medicinal purposes. The reason?
“The parallel concern making it appropriate to include marijuana… is the likelihood that the high demand in the interstate market will draw such marijuana into that market.”
Put simply, if California legalizes marijuana, the supply into other states will surely be affected, making the issue a matter of federal commerce.
Based on all this, I’d say it would be a tough go in the Supreme Court for this law. Too bad.