Ohh boy, where to begin? I had never thought about this issue before, because I used to have faith in our federal government, but ever since the election in 2000 I have begun loosing faith.
So to the point; states, as described in the Constitution (ever heard of it?) States are supposed to have the right to make and enforce their own laws, and yet the federal government is always sticking it's nose where it doesn't belong! Here's a for instance i just read about where the federal government is preventing a woman from taking the medicine prescribed to her by her doctor! The federal government is KILLING this woman and therefore it HAS FAILED.
We are very close to the end. I am not a doomsayer but I am saying it now. We are going down quickly, all hands on board.
3 comments:
The way Ms. Raich is being persecuted is a tragedy. It demonstrates the federal government's unabridged hubris. A state passes a law upholding individual liberty, but it clashes with the federal government's agenda - so the state's law is overriden.
Such hypocrisy.
Here's a federal government that, during the Schiavo debacle and the abortion debate, said they have to intervene to "preserve a culture of life" even though it flies in the face of some states' laws. But when some states (Texas) continue to use the death penalty, we don't hear anything from these same "culture of life" folks. Go figure.
But don't lose heart, E. All is not lost. A DC Circuit court panel recently affirmed, for the first time, that the 2nd Amendment is indeed an individual right guaranteed by the Constitution.
Yo E!
So the reason the Feds have jurisdiction over this is the following: under what's known as the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution, the Federal Government has the power to "regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes."
This has been understood to mean that as long as an issue has some bearing on interstate commerce, it can be legislated upon by Congress. Many issues are somewhat tenuously linked to interstate commerce to allow the government to regulate them. Wetlands protection, for instance, is based in part on the effect on the tourism industry of birdwatchers interested in migratory waterfowl.
The drug connection was re-affirmed in 2005 in Gonzales v. Raich, in which the Supreme Court affirmed the right of Congress to ban medicinal marijuana use despite the fact that the pot was grown, bought, and used within a single state.
Which is to say that this is a really crappy application of what is sometimes a useful power. Speaks more to the spinelessness of Congress than anything else, in my opinion.
Umm, so yeah... the Supreme Court case I cited was the very same one you were talking about! heh...
Post a Comment