Homestead mailing list

[Rob <becida AT comcast.net>]

At  6/6/2005 10:32 AM, you wrote:
> Federal Authorities May Prosecute Medical Use of Marijuana
> Supreme Court Rules States' Laws Do Not Protect Users
>
> By Fred Barbash
> Washington Post Staff Writer
> Monday, June 6, 2005; 12:59 PM
>
> The Supreme Court ruled today that the federal government has the power to 
> prosecute the use of marijuana for medical purposes even in states that 
> have enacted laws permitting it.
>
> In a 6-3 decision, the court agreed with the Bush administration that the 
> regulation of controlled substances, including marijuana, is the province 
> of Congress without exception.
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/06/AR2005060600564.html


>>But he concluded that the court had no choice but to uphold Congress's 
"firmly established" power to regulate "purely local activities . . . that 
have a substantial effect on interstate commerce."<<

>>But Stevens concluded that the court was still bound by a 1942 Supreme 
Court decision that defined interstate commerce broadly to include, under 
certain circumstances, even subsistence wheat farming<<


I wonder if they even bother anymore to argue the 10th amendment on things 
where the fed does in fact run the states, even with no clear cut authority 
to do so.


Rob
``````````````````

Amendment X

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.