The federal ban on medical marijuana: Life at the bottom of the slippery slope

Welcome to the bottom of the slippery slope.

In 1973, the U.S. Congress passed the Controlled Substances Act and asserted that the federal government had the power, under an elastic definition of interstate commerce, to regulate and prohibit certain drugs. Was it a usurpation of powers that the U.S. Constitution had reserved to the states? You betcha. Prohibition of alcohol required a constitutional amendment.

But drugs are dangerous and voters elect politicians who take a hard line against them. And one step at a time, we have stumbled down the slope to where we are now: the Supreme Court just told the states that they do not have the power to legalize marijuana for medical uses. Or, more precisely, that users of state-sanctioned medical marijuana can be prosecuted for a federal crime even if the marijuana is not sold across state lines, even if the marijuana is grown at home by the person who uses it and there is no "commerce" at all.

Why did the U.S. Supreme Court reach this decision?

Well, it appears that six of the justices were reluctant to constrain the federal government's power by enforcing the Tenth Amendment, which would cause no end of havoc in federal law if the American people ever took a moment to read it.

If you would like to read it, you might like to click over to Marijuana, Prohibition and the Tenth Amendment at www.SusanShelley.com.



Copyright 2005

.