Did Rep. Andy Harris inadvertently legalize marijuana possession in D.C.?

[Eleanors38]

23. The precedent, as I read it: No state can restrict the

privileges & immunities of a U.S. citizen. It does not prevent a state's exercise of power as long as it doesn't abridge those privileges & immunities as described in the BOR. This dynamic has been seen before. Exp: Gideon said essentially that the state of FL could not (14A) pass laws abridging Gideon's right to "assistance of counsel" (6A). Any abridgement of any right by a state runs afoul of the 14th, as well as the enumerated BOR right. The McDonald ruling is one of several such.

I'm not sure what Congress will do if D.C. has constructed a cantilevered bridge with no gusset plates. But in lieu of action, the question becomes whether or not D.C.'s laws represent the privileges & immunities of all U.S. citizens, esp. With regards equal protection of the law.

Home rule (or not, in D.C.'s case) is a bitch.

This might be a question to throw out at Volokh Conspiracy's site. (It is now with WAPO.) Yeah, it's libertarian, but Heller & McDonald were brought by Cato Institute lawyers; you find your friends where you find them.

On edit: Crudely put, a law regarding pot use & its penalties in D.C. is de facto making some U.S. citizens "more equal than others," and may be a violation of equal protection rights. Ve-l-l-ly intelesting.