The Conservative Cave
Current Events => General Discussion => Topic started by: Old n Grumpy on January 04, 2018, 09:20:19 AM
-
https://apnews.com/19f6bfec15a74733b40eaf0ff9162bfa (https://apnews.com/19f6bfec15a74733b40eaf0ff9162bfa)
This should really get the liberal / progressives heads exploding. Hit them in the bong!! :-)
It should be pretty easy to put an end to this by raiding the biggest growers and sellers.
Another obama "legacy" item going down the tubes.
MAGA you have to love it!! :cheersmate: :cheersmate: :cheersmate:
-
No question this is going to SCOTUS this year.
This is a fundamental question about American Federalism -- see Texas v. White.
As fun as it is to see liberal heads explode about this it will be more satisfying to see them take refuge in the 9th and 10th Amendments, which they hate.
If you care about State's Rights, you need to support the individual states on this one.
-
If you support states rights on this how about sanctuary states? where does it stop?
I can understand the medical part for those who really need it, but the rest I don't think it is such a good idea.
-
No question this is going to SCOTUS this year.
This is a fundamental question about American Federalism -- see Texas v. White.
As fun as it is to see liberal heads explode about this it will be more satisfying to see them take refuge in the 9th and 10th Amendments, which they hate.
If you care about State's Rights, you need to support the individual states on this one.
Agreed. Let all the proglodytes and communists hang out where they can elect Nancy Pelousy, Dianne Feinstein, and the rest of the wackos. They unfortunately have tied themselves to the Left and the Least Coasts, which makes it difficult here in flyover country to enjoy the beach and ski resorts.
Seriously, states should be calling the shots on this one. I have no desire to live in Colorado either. They can have that "Rocky Mountain High."
-
If you support states rights on this how about sanctuary states? where does it stop?
I can understand the medical part for those who really need it, but the rest I don't think it is such a good idea.
From what I understand, the idea for sanctuary cities was started by (where else?) the city of Berzerkley, Commiefornia. You know, the land of Nancy Pelousy and the rest of the fruitcakes.
The state didn't have squat to do with it - at least initially.
That's tantamount for certain cities, who think their collective feces doesn't draw flies, to poke a finger in the eyes of the feds AND the states and say, "Hey - we don't have a problem with illegals and we're gonna make it easy for them to congregate here."
-
Sorry the states can't trump the federal law. If that's the case, we can institute slavery again if a state so chooses. The states that have legalized this are in direct conflict of the supremacy clause and hence their legalization is therefore unconstitutional and illegal.
I honestly believe that this is Trump once again making the congress act and the fact that we're just going to follow the law. This again was just a memo stating that federal law enforcement wouldn't enforce the law. So just like in DACA, Trump is telling congress to do your damn job.
-
I honestly believe that this is Trump once again making the congress act and the fact that we're just going to follow the law. This again was just a memo stating that federal law enforcement wouldn't enforce the law. So just like in DACA, Trump is telling congress to do your damn job.
Congress has often taken the easy way out and let unelected bureaucrats make laws and penalties for laws.
-
Sorry the states can't trump the federal law. If that's the case, we can institute slavery again if a state so chooses. The states that have legalized this are in direct conflict of the supremacy clause and hence their legalization is therefore unconstitutional and illegal.
Umm, the 10th Amendment says otherwise:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The States can't trump Federal law in any area where The Constitution gives the Federal Government supremacy (this includes slavery, via the 13th Amendment). Where the Federal Government has been given no specific authority by the Constitution, the STATES are the supreme authority over the matter, sir.
-
Sorry the states can't trump the federal law. If that's the case, we can institute slavery again if a state so chooses. The states that have legalized this are in direct conflict of the supremacy clause and hence their legalization is therefore unconstitutional and illegal.
I honestly believe that this is Trump once again making the congress act and the fact that we're just going to follow the law. This again was just a memo stating that federal law enforcement wouldn't enforce the law. So just like in DACA, Trump is telling congress to do your damn job.
It isn't the states that are trying to trump (no pun intended) federal law. It's individual cities. At least, that's how the whole mess got started. No doubt somewhere along the line the proglodytes in Sacramento, Salem, and Olympia decided to jump on the bandwagon and join the bleeding heart club, but individual cities ought to be accountable for their actions.
Lots and lots of back and forth about the "supremacy" clause, which explains why the 10th Amendment isn't really worth the paper it's printed on any more.
-
Umm, the 10th Amendment says otherwise:
The States can't trump Federal law in any area where The Constitution gives the Federal Government supremacy (this includes slavery, via the 13th Amendment). Where the Federal Government has been given no specific authority by the Constitution, the STATES are the supreme authority over the matter, sir.
Sorry, th federal government was given specific authority to pass laws and as such they become the law of the land pr Aricle VI.
-
The only thing I've ever heard that marijuana is UNIQUELY useful for medically is glaucoma, as far as chronic pain, there's only about a hundred alternatives to it that don't contain MJ or THC. Fortunately I don't have a dog in the fight and don't really care how it comes out. The potheads and dope docs turned medical MJ into a joke, they have only themselves to blame for the DOJ deciding it was a bullshit excuse.
-
Sorry, th federal government was given specific authority to pass laws and as such they become the law of the land pr Aricle VI.
The federal government was also given specific areas over which it COULD make laws: Article I, Section 8 covers the majority of them. This is what the 10th Amendment is referring to in the "powers not delegated to it by the Constitution" clause: if it ain't on the list of specific, enumerated powers, the Feds have no authority to legislate on it.
-
If you support states rights on this how about sanctuary states? where does it stop?
I can understand the medical part for those who really need it, but the rest I don't think it is such a good idea.
They already made the legal argument, when they sued over the Arizona immigration enforcement statute, that immigration is a federal issue and that states must stay out of it.
-
The only thing I've ever heard that marijuana is UNIQUELY useful for medically is glaucoma, as far as chronic pain, there's only about a hundred alternatives to it that don't contain MJ or THC. Fortunately I don't have a dog in the fight and don't really care how it comes out. The potheads and dope docs turned medical MJ into a joke, they have only themselves to blame for the DOJ deciding it was a bullshit excuse.
Same here. I will say that from my experience, I've seen MJ almost always inevitably brings sorrow along with it, in some way or another.
-
If you support states rights on this how about sanctuary states? where does it stop?
I can understand the medical part for those who really need it, but the rest I don't think it is such a good idea.
Immigration law is 100% in the Federal Executive branch, per the Constitution.
The USC is silent on "illegal drugs" -- and the feds should have been the same.
-
The libs se this as a way to garner votes and a tax windfall. However in reality is is a cash cow for a while, but eventually it has a diminishing return. Like gambling, when casinos were few and far between they were very profitable, now they are almost everywhere and not as profitable as they once were.
With the pot, the states will build a multi million dollar beaurocacy to tax and control it. the added costs will eventually kil the demand as it is a weed and you can grow your own for free. and then the black market will end up selling the over supply at a discount.
There are lots of unconsidered consequences with this, and I don't think it will end well.
There is a show called the profit with Marcus Lemonis, he went to california and looked into this, it is an eye opener.
-
Same here. I will say that from my experience, I've seen MJ almost always inevitably brings sorrow along with it, in some way or another.
I tried it in college.
Could not STAND the effect.