Since the inception of California’s medical marijuana law, the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, the state has been in a tug-of-war with the federal government. This is a classic example of states’ rights. Many of the cultivators and distributors, who are a “legal” part of the supply chain, as well as the patients, have been walking on a tight-rope. Prosecution from the federal government looms over them, creating the same anxiety as someone about to plummet 150 feet to their death -- with only the state to act as a safety net. Currently 14 states support legislation for medical marijuana: Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. The 14 states, the DEA, and the FBI will be receiving memos instructing them to reduce their efforts in prosecuting medical marijuana cultivators, distributors, and patients and increase their efforts in prosecuting crimes involving violence, illegal arms sales, selling to minors, money laundering, and many other drug related crimes. Although the laws still remain on the books, the enforcement may change.
Regardless of one’s position on medical marijuana, states rights’ advocates have to side with the White House on this issue. The issue is not just about the states fighting the federal government over medical marijuana laws. There are other issues in the same category such as: the death penalty, assisted suicide, gay marriage, just to name a few. In all of these cases the federal government has been there to intervene with their laws that in many cases supersede the states’ laws. On the surface the White House position on medical marijuana may be a big states’ rights victory, but only time will tell. Many federal agencies will still have the ability to follow federal law and prosecute people distributing, cultivating, and/or using medical marijuana. At that point it will be up to the Supreme Court to decide. In 2005 the Supreme Court sided with the federal government in the Gonzales v. Raich case. It is unclear whether the new high court will rule the same way. The only real victory would be if a law were passed that would allow state and local governments to supersede the laws of the federal government on the medical marijuana issue. This could open up a whole new set of laws allowing the states to be fully responsible for enforcing their own constitution, rather than theirs and that of the federal government. If there exists towns in America that are “dry” (no alcohol), then why can’t the law work the other way. The ATF doesn’t come into a dry town and force the sale of alcohol, as they shouldn’t. The federal government has to continue to work to find common ground where the states’ rights prevail without being ignorant of the occasional needs of the US as a whole. Until laws are passed preserving these rights, the ruling class in DC will supersede the power and authority of our individual states. Citation:http://usconservatives.about.com/od/williamweisscommentary/a/Weiss-5.htm |