>Recently, US Attorney General Eric Holder issued a memo to all former heads of the DEA which basically said that they [The Feds] would fight Prop 19 if it passes. “”We will vigorously enforce the CSA against those individuals and organizations that possess, manufacture or distribute marijuana for recreational use, even if such activities are permitted under state law,” Holder wrotein the letter.

Are they that scared? So scared of legal weed that they are issuing what amounts to a preemptive attack on the will of the people of California?

Under the C.S.A. (Controlled Substances Act of 1970) marijuana will still be a Schedule 1 narcotic, even if Prop 19 passes. Which basically means that the Feds can (and apparently will) continue to arrest cannabis consumers even if they’re in compliance with state law. This brings up two important questions in my mind. How do they plan on enforcing the CSA in California without the assistance of local law enforcement? Secondly, have they heard about the Tenth Amendment?

Let’s start with the enforcement issue. Did you know most marijuana busts are carried out by local police, State Troopers, and Sher riffs. Not DEA agents. So if the guys who do most of the grunt work can’t legally do the grunt work, then who does? If the Feds come down hard in Cali, well it’s the Balloon Effect all over again. Squeeze down on one end of a balloon and the other end inflates. Squeeze Cali, and some dude in Oklahoma will take the opportunity of less DEA enforcement to start his own grow. Or meth lab. We don’t have the manpower to enforce prohibition on a Federal level now, so how exactly does Holder plan on enforcing the CSA?

As we’ve seen with Raich . Gonzales, the Supreme Court has already set precedent. If state laws affect other state’s commerce, then the Federal Government has jurisdiction, not the state. And since the Supreme Court’s Conservative to Liberal ratio hasn’t changed since Raich, they will return the same verdict if Holder tries to sue as the Obama administration did with Arizona’s controversial immigration law.

But what about the 10th Amendment? This article in the Bill of Rights expressly forbids the government’s intrusion on state matters except when those issues directly conflict with the Constitution. And since the CSA is not to be found anywhere in our most sacred Hempen document, the Feds would be in violation of the Constitution if they proceed down this path. In Justice O’Connor’s dissenting opinion; “Federalism promotes innovation by allowing for the possibility that “a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country…” Not that it matters, since we’ve seen time and time again, the Supreme Court doesn’t care about the Constitution. Or Federalism. Or sanity.

Another point that has been risen; Why is an increasingly disliked administration taking such a stand when the majority of their demographic is for legalization? Yes, most Dems favor some form of marijuana reform. So why is Obama appointee Eric Holder trying to alienate their constituency? With the in early election polls, why not make cannabis reform a major plank in your campaign? Polls show that most Americans would agree with you. What kind of idiocy is this?!

No matter what happens in the aftermath, Prop 19 needs to pass. Let the Feds do what they will. The important thing is that the people of California make their voices heard this November 2nd, and force the Feds’ hand. Whatever their response, it will better prepare us for the next round.

Legalize It.
-PT-

Advertisements