Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 78

Thread: "Legal" Pot Taxing CO Law Enforcement

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by This_person View Post
    I have no argument with the potential we'll consider it similar to the Prohibition Era. It's certainly possible.

    But, it's pretty clear the states don't have the authority to legalize it. They can take the authority, via 3/4 of them agreeing to a change to the constitution, but as of today they do not have the authority to pick and choose what federal laws they like or don't. Since the 17th amendment was passed, they gave up their republican role in the federal government (contrary to Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution). So, the discussion of whether it is legal or not is moot.

    Meanwhile, the job of the AG is represent the United States in terms of law and law enforcement. I would rather he do his job than not.
    Like most laws, it's a bit tricky.

    This report by the Congressional Research Service specifically dives into federal issues regarding marijuana legalization by states. It specifically mentions Article IV as well.

    Although the federal government may use its power of the purse to encourage states to adopt certain criminal laws, the federal government is limited in its ability to directly influence state policy by the Tenth Amendment, which prevents the federal government from directing states to enact specific legislation, or requiring state officials to enforce federal law. As such, the fact that the federal government has criminalized conduct does not mean that the state, in turn, must also criminalize or prosecute that same conduct.
    ...under both Tenth Amendment and preemption principles, federal and state courts have previously held that a state’s decision to simply permit what the federal government prohibits does not create a 'positive conflict' with federal law
    http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43034.pdf
    Crybaby Cripplecrow Hanging on a Monkey's Toe Club

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Larry Gude View Post
    If the right still supports states rights it should be cheering the states re-asserting themselves. However, that all started to turn with the first gay marriage states. Then, the right started becoming federalists.

    So, we have an opportunity for those who want education to leave DC, transportation and anything else the right USED to complain was better left to the states. Couple the issues, piggy back those on the weed.
    Federalism started before the Constitution was ratified, but getting the states out of the federal government ####ed the states pretty hard. And, they took it. They can still take it back.

    But, nullification through a change in laws in the state contrary to the Constitution is not the way to do it. That's been done with 2A for decades, and wasn't right then. It's not right with drugs, either. States HAVE the authority to change this, to reassert their authority and dominance - they didn't give up Article V yet - but they need to do it that way, not by being impudent teenagers about it.
    It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society.
    Jiddu Krisnamurti

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris0nllyn View Post
    Like most laws, it's a bit tricky.

    This report by the Congressional Research Service specifically dives into federal issues regarding marijuana legalization by states. It specifically mentions Article IV as well.





    http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43034.pdf
    Which is why I suggest the federal government must enforce the federal laws. I'm not suggesting Sherriff Joe Johnson of Bumfukegypt, CO start enforcing federal law because he knows it is supreme to state law, I'm saying the feds have to do what the feds say is law.
    It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society.
    Jiddu Krisnamurti

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by This_person View Post
    Which is why I suggest the federal government must enforce the federal laws. I'm not suggesting Sherriff Joe Johnson of Bumfukegypt, CO start enforcing federal law because he knows it is supreme to state law, I'm saying the feds have to do what the feds say is law.
    The report above leads me to believe there isn't a conflict with federal law.
    Crybaby Cripplecrow Hanging on a Monkey's Toe Club

  5. #15
    And MD was nicknamed The Free State why???? (Hint... It had nothing to do with religious tolerance.)
    "Pain heals. Chicks dig scars. Glory... lasts forever." - Shane Falco

  6. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris0nllyn View Post
    The report above leads me to believe there isn't a conflict with federal law.
    I think it means state law enforcement is not held to the requirement of upholding federal law if state law is different. But, federal law enforcement can still enforce federal law.
    It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society.
    Jiddu Krisnamurti

  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by This_person View Post
    I think it means state law enforcement is not held to the requirement of upholding federal law if state law is different. But, federal law enforcement can still enforce federal law.
    Again, the report I linked discusses the DOJ's options.

    Via prosecutorial discretion, the DOJ has issued 3 memos outlining their stance on the issue begining in 2009.
    In 2009, Deputy Attorney General David W. Ogden provided guidance to federal prosecutors in states that have authorized the use of medical marijuana. Citing a desire to make “efficient and rational use of its limited investigative and prosecutorial resources,” the memorandum stated that while the “prosecution of significant traffickers of illegal drugs, including marijuana … continues to be a core priority,” federal prosecutors “should not focus federal resources on individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana.” The memorandum made clear, however, that “this guidance [does not] preclude investigation or prosecution, even where there is clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state law, in particular circumstances where investigation or prosecution otherwise serves important federal interests.”
    In 2011,
    The Ogden (2009 memo) memorandum was never intended to shield such activities from federal enforcement action and prosecution, even where those activities purport to comply with state law. Persons who are in the business of cultivating, selling or distributing marijuana, and those who knowingly facilitate such activities, are in violation of the [CSA] regardless of state law. Consistent with resource constraints and the discretion you may exercise in your district, such persons are subject to federal enforcement action, including potential prosecution.
    In 2013,
    The Obama Administration’s official response to the Colorado and Washington initiatives was provided on August 29, 2013, when Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole sent a memorandum to all U.S. Attorneys intended to guide the “exercise of investigative and prosecutorial discretion”...The
    memorandum expresses DOJ’s position that, although marijuana is a dangerous drug that remains illegal under federal law, the federal government will not pursue legal challenges against jurisdictions that authorize marijuana in some fashion, assuming those state and local governments maintain strict regulatory and enforcement controls on marijuana cultivation, distribution, sale, and possession that limit the risks to “public safety, public health, and other law enforcement interests.”
    The report also offers examples of ways the DOJ can respond. i.e. criminal prosecutions, forefiture, civil lawsuit, and denying firearms to users.
    Crybaby Cripplecrow Hanging on a Monkey's Toe Club

  8. #18
    Registered User
    Member Since
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    19,776
    Quote Originally Posted by stgislander View Post
    And MD was nicknamed The Free State why???? (Hint... It had nothing to do with religious tolerance.)
    Didn't have anything to do with taxes either. That's obvious.

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by This_person View Post
    CNN Highlights Marijuana Legalization 'Straining' Police in Colorado
    I thought it's going to be all rainbows and puppydogs. What happened ?

  10. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Merlin99 View Post
    I don't think I have a problem with this, but then again I don't think it should have ever been illegal.
    Same here.

Members who have read this thread: 56

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search:     Advanced Search
Search HELP

| Home | Help | Contact Us | About somd.com | Privacy | Advertising | Sponsors | Newsletter |

| What's New | What's Cool | Top Rated | Add A Link | Mod a Link |

| Announcements | Bookstore | Cafe | Calendar | Classifieds | Community |
| Culture | Dating | Dining | Education | Employment | Entertainment |
| Forums | Free E-Mail | Games | Gear! | Government | Guestbook | Health | Marketplace | Mortgage | News |
| Organizations | Photos | Real Estate | Relocation | Sports | Survey | Travel | Wiki | Weather | Worship |