Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
Thu Nov 15, 2012, 01:23 AM Nov 2012

Marijuana Legalization: What Can/Will the Feds Do? [View all]

http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2012/nov/14/what_will_feds_do_about_marijuana_legalization

So far, the federal response has been muted. The White House has not commented, the Office of National Drug Control Policy has not commented, and the Department of Justice has limited its comments to observing that it will continue to enforce the federal Controlled Substances Act.

"My understanding is that Justice was completely taken aback by this and by the wide margin of passage," said Eric Sterling, former counsel to the House Judiciary Committee and currently the executive director of the Criminal Justice Policy Foundation. "They believed this would be a repeat of 2010, and they are really kind of astonished because they understand that this is a big thing politically and a complicated problem legally. People are writing memos, thinking about the relationship between federal and state law, doctrines of preemption, and what might be permitted under the UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs."


Here is another group that didn't seem to think polls were telling the truth.

The article goes on to note the standard line about fed law and state law and quotes a former Drug Czar employee who said the crackdowns in CA regarding mmj provide a template for expected responses.

Then this article gets more interesting...

Less clear is what else, exactly, the federal government can do. While federal drug laws may "trump" state laws, it is not at all certain that they preempt them. Preemption has a precise legal meaning, signifying that federal law supersedes state law and that the conflicting state law is null and void.

"Opponents of these laws would love nothing more than to be able to preempt them, but there is not a viable legal theory to do that," said Alex Kreit, a constitutional law expert at the Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego who co-authored an amicus brief on preemption in a now mooted California medical marijuana case. "Under the anti-commandeering principle, the federal government can't force a state to make something illegal. It can provide incentives to do so, but it can't outright force a state to criminalize marijuana."


good read - more at the link above.
7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
WA Gov. Meets with DOJ RainDog Nov 2012 #1
Gregoire rocks liberal_at_heart Nov 2012 #6
She seems to be very saavy RainDog Nov 2012 #7
From California. They are going to be hard asses nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #2
But they cannot stop everyone RainDog Nov 2012 #3
Keep your eye in the DC court of appeals nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #4
Yeah, I've posted about that here in the Drug Policy Forum RainDog Nov 2012 #5
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Marijuana Legalization: W...