Live Stoner Chat Feds vs State

[Magic]

To my knowledge, I grew up thinking state law trumped federal law. I know that that cannabis is a schedule 1 drug in a federal level but can someone please tell me how the hell is it when its legal in 2 states?I feel like state use the federal status as a crutch for limiting the use, be heres my real problem all the companies and politician use the same line " well under federal it'd illegal" you know what I want to say to those people? Grow Some balls and stand up for the peoples rights! That just comes to show how many state officals work hand and hand with the feds or officials actually believe that federal law trumps state law and if so they should not be in office. Federal law only beats out state law when there is a conflict between states in since every state has different laws, law enforcement and officials are having a field day with that simple fact, and keeping things illegal. Any time you hear "fed says its illegal" I want you to call bullshit! if towns,cities, and states really wanted to they can legalize almost anything by law ask Colorado and Washington. What do you guys think? How can we get people to see federal law don't matter when it comes to cannabis legalization? We need to move the feds out of our states! Until then it will continue to be a shit show!

 

[Roark]

Well it is pretty clearly right that federal does trump state law when in conflict with the constitution. However a 2/3rds majority vote by the states can change an amendment. The real question should be whether the controlled substances avt is actually legal under the constitution. And what grounds tricky dick Nixon had when he passed it. Let alone how they passed prohibition of cannabis in 1937 and why?

If you haven't read smoke signals you should. Martin Lee does a great job with that book. Its on audible too. I highly recommend it! .

 

[wwwillie]

Personally, my opinion is that if a state wants to legalize they will and that the federal law is just another excuse used to not legalize. An example would be the recent ruling by the Massachusetts SJC that the odor of unburnt cannabis can NOT be used as a reason to search a vehicle. This goes with the 2010 ruling that the smell of burnt cannabis can NOT be used a probable cause. The reason being that it was voted and passed that possession of under 1 ounce is not a criminal offence and only punishable by a civil fine. Therefore the odors were not sufficient probable cause of criminal intent. They also went on to reject the argument made by local police that it is illeagal under federal law. To quote: "The fact that such conduct is technically subject to a Federal prohibition does not provide an independent justification for warrantless search"
So clearly, to me any way, a state can do this if the want. Also though, I think (need more research) that the feds can still cause a problem if the wanted to press the issue but the decision was made to not press it.

 

[thetreeman]

States can legalize and choose not to enforce federal law, BUT the feds can still come in and enforce federal law themselves. They have jurisdiction to do just about whatever they want, anywhere they want, and they have their own court system to prosecute in so you cant count on getting off in a 'state' court.

 

[Muddy]

Who would ever have thought that the biggest states rights issue since the Civil War would be cannabis?

 

[wwwillie]

Who would ever have thought that the biggest states rights issue since the Civil War would be cannabis?

Amen Brother!

 

[Roark]

Well I'm not sure about biggest issue since the civil war. See women's rights and african american rights issues. Though there certainly are more people in prison because of the feds misuse of it's powers to regulate peoples peronal affairs. Thanks a lot no fun having, pill popin drunk tricky dick nixon. I didn't capitalize his name on purpose. I may just have to re-read the constitution today. Thanks guys.