Under the Constitution, Congress may pass laws regulating a state's economic activity so long as it involves "interstate commerce" that crosses state borders. The California marijuana in question was homegrown, distributed to patients without charge and without crossing state lines.So it's not interstate commerce! A pretty motley group of Sandra Day O'Connor, William Rehnquist, and Clarence Thomas were in the minority, voting to allow it on states' rights grounds. John Paul Stevens, who wrote the majority opinion banning it, wrote that part of his decision was because of "unscrupulous physicians who overprescribe when it is sufficiently profitable to do so." That's a stupid reason. If that happens, then prosecute those doctors or take away their licenses. No one banned penicillin because doctors overprescribe it. Come on.
6/06/2005
so the Supreme Court just outlawed medical marijuana. That sucks. It helps people, 10 states and DC have already passed laws, and now this. I guess they are just ruling on whether the law allows it as it's written today, but still, it makes it tough for legalization advocates. What sucks is this part:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
See -- this is the kind of judicial activism you get in a post-New Deal judicial system with an expanded commerce clause that lets almost everything pass. Kinda funny how liberals are now complaining about it when it goes against them?
I'm complaining because his reasoning is stupid. If you think marijuana is bad and should be illegal, say it, don't say that doctors might prescribe it too much. I am not familiar with other commerce clause cases, really. As for other stuff, i.e. states' rights, all I want is some consistency from folks. And dope.
Post a Comment