Federal Marijuana Laws May No Longer Be Necessary
Federal laws against the cultivation and sale of marijuana may 'no longer be necessary,' according to Clarence Thomas, one of the Supreme Court's most conservative justices.
He outlined his views on Monday as the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal by a Colorado medical marijuana dispensary against the decision to deny it federal tax breaks afford to other businesses.
In a five-page statement, Thomas wrote that a federal ban on marijuana cultivation, possession and use may once have made sense.
But today's piecemeal approach, he said, with states able to make up their own policies meant the prohibition was no longer appropriate.
'Once comprehensive, the federal government’s current approach is a half-in, half-out regime that simultaneously tolerates and forbids local use of marijuana,' he wrote.
'This contradictory and unstable state of affairs strains basic principles of federalism and conceals traps for the unwary.'
Justice Clarence Thomas said federal laws on marijuana may 'no longer be necessary' as he slammed a 'contradictory and unstable state of affairs' that 'strains basic principles of federalism and conceals traps for the unwary'
His comments come as campaigners push for reform, pointing out that public opinion has softened on the issue as 18 states - plus two territories and Washington D.C. - have legalized recreational marijuana use since 2012
His comments come as lawmakers try to capitalize on social justice campaigns to kickstart a major overhaul of laws
Some 36 states now allow the medical use of marijuana and 18 - as well as two territories and Washington D.C. - permit its recreational use.
Last year, President Biden was the only major Democratic primary candidate to oppose federal legalization of the plant.
He said more study was needed, a position that has not changed since he took office. This year the White House fired. Disciplined staffers for past pot use.
Meanwhile Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has said he is ready to move ahead with major changes to the laws, but has yet to say whether that would mean full federal decriminalization or a more modest push to decriminalization.
Public opinion has softened on the issue in recent years.
In April, Pew Research published a poll reporting that 60 percent of respondents believed marijuana should be legal for medical and recreational use while 31 percent said it should should be legal for medical use only.
RELATED ARTICLES
Previous
1
Next
High times! More than 90% of Americans back full... Virginia becomes first southern state and 16th in US to... The grass IS greener! White House says Joe Biden supports... 'We're going to move forward, period.' Chuck Schumer says...
Share this article
Share
71 shares
Thomas said the changing legal landscape meant the Supreme Court's 2005 decision in Gonzales v Raich, that Congress could prohibit the cultivation and use of marijuana, was outdated.
'Whatever the merits of Raich when it was decided, federal policies of the past 16 years have greatly undermined its reasoning,' he wrote.
'Once comprehensive, the Federal Government’s current approach is a half-in, half-out regime that simultaneously tolerates and forbids local use of marijuana.'
At the same time, he said, Congress has repeatedly barred the Justice Department from spending federal money on anything that would interfere with state medical marijuana laws.
'Given all these developments, one can certainly understand why an ordinary person might think that the Federal Government has retreated from its once-absolute ban on marijuana,' he wrote.
To connect with mmj doctors follow the link.
ReplyDelete