Legal Marijuana, finally?
On Nov.19th, California will seek to legalize marijuana for recreational use for everyone over 21. Proposition 19 will allow anyone over 21 to posses 1 ounce at any time and the state will tax it. Any household with at least one person over 21 will also be allowed to grow as many plants as you can fit into a 5ft. by 5ft, plot.
All of the preliminary polls taken show that people favor the new law and that is would pass. With marijuana already holding the #2 position on cash crops, the first being grapes for wine, the state could easily balance their budget in less than 2 years. The jails would be a lot less crowded, helping with costs again, and leaving more room for people who commit more serious crimes.
My question is: Will the people who really need this to pass be able to pry themselves away from the TV and the Cheetos and get out and vote?? I know I will be putting in a yes vote. I am a medical marijuana patient and can smoke it legally anyway, but when the price drops by 70 to 80 per cent as they say it will, that will be even better.
I will guarantee that if should be passed, the Feds will file a suit to get it overturned!
>”On Nov.19th, California will seek to legalize marijuana for recreational use for everyone over 21. ”
Here’s the issue, unless they can rewrite the employment/drug testing laws, the unemployment rate will go up! For example, although it may be legalized in CA, the participants would not be able to obtain or keep a Federal Civil Service job!
>”I am a medical marijuana patient and can smoke it legally anyway”
Whatever!
The only problem here is it’s irrelevant as to whether California voters go for the ballot initiative or not.
As long as federal law maintains that marijuana is a controlled substance, California is in no position to say otherwise.
It essentially comes down to the supremacy clause in article VI of the US constitution which establishes federal law as the supreme law of the land. As the Supreme Court has routinely held, any state law which conflicts with a valid federal statute is void and unenforceable.
What that means in practical terms is that California may choose to not take action on the local level, but the federal agencies and drug courts would ramp up into high gear with raids as we saw with medicinal marijuana in California a couple years ago.
Now, Holder directed the DOJ to back off on the issue of medicinal marijuana (despite the fact that the SC held California’s medicinal marijuana laws were nullified by the supremacy clause), but should California attempt widespread commercialization, you’ll see the DOJ come down like the fist of an angry god.
What’s more, the US government has the option to exert pressure on the California legislature to fall in line by withdrawing federal funding, which the state can’t afford to lose. It’s an effective tactic and one that’s been used several times in the past to pressure states in to a standard speed limit as well as standardized lower BAC limits (with MADD’s campaigning in the 80s)