I am doing a speech on proposition 19 and I have read that it has become a civil rights issues. As substantial evidence, I would like to know what part of the Constitution does prohibition violate? Any help at all would be greatly appreciated.
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 »
it dosn’t
a video on why pot is illegal
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7O4Sa8sGXk
The Tenth Amendment right for the States to decide their own policy.
Amendment 10.
The Tenth Amendment restates the Constitution’s principle of federalism by providing that powers not granted to the national government nor prohibited to the states by the Constitution of the United States are reserved to the states or the people.
read the constitution its not really that long. i dont think that the fed govt should have the power to dictate wether someone should be able to smoke or not… look at when we werent able to drink and what happened. it should be state law because the constitution ( unless an amendment says it ) doesnt give the federal government the ability to dictate drug laws.
i think its article 3 section … 10 maybe
Marijuana prohibition doesn’t violate any part of the Constitution…as far as I know. It’s not a Constitutional issue. But turning every piddling legal question into a Constitutional issue seems to be America’s new hobby.
If you google Constitutional Marijuana Legalization, you’ll get some links to Libertarian arguments that it’s a state’s rights issue covered under Amendment #10.
I am not aware that it technically violates any article of the constitution. Congress has the authority to declare a substance ‘illegal’ and does not have much in the way of any standard to satisfy other than the necessary number of votes. However, I have always speculated that the criminalization of marijuana violates amendment 1 of the bill of rights in that it is essentially a religious law because it is based on no scientific finding and has no merit other than pure philosophical arbitrary moral judgment, which I argue qualifies the law as ‘religious’ in nature. I would compare it to a law requiring us to fast on Sundays or to wear some specific form of head dress on Mondays. The prohibition of marijuana is based solely on some minority judgment that it is simply ‘objectionable’ in their personal opinion.
‘Think Outside the Box’ is right and wrong in that assessment. The state determines what the federal government does not have the authority to determine but the federal government simply voted itself the authority to make it a federal issue (it never should have done it and it was morally wrong, but procedurally, it is constitutional).