Tuesday, June 07, 2005
Uh, it's medicinal. Without it, I could go ... even blinder!
Regarding the Supreme Court's decision yesterday saying that federal drug laws trumped state laws allowing medical marijuana ... I think four things:
1) I agree with Digby that Antonin Scalia is a huge freaking creep, a hypocrite of the highest order, and the single most important reason that the Democrats' loss last year was a major, major problem (because we simply can't afford any more justices like him).
2) When it comes to states' rights ... I feel that the difference between Jim Crow laws, anti-gay initiatives, and other laws that have identifiable "political minorities" unable to protect themselves politically without relief from the courts or the federal government on the one hand, and the medical marijuana laws on the other (where no such minorities exist), is pretty significant, and is potentially a substantial hole in the entire states' rights argument. I'm not high-falutin' legal mind here, and am pretty much just guessing, but does anyone agree that our drug laws seem to be a pretty clear overreach of federal power in a way that isn't justified by constitutional theories of the protection of the powerless?
3) I have met people in my life who have sampled marijuana, and they are just like you and me, just a little more selfish and hedonistic, and forgetful. I have heard that it can be a very social activity. I forget where I was going with this.
4) I very much believe that medical marijuana is a WINNER issue for Democrats, not just in the West. The congressional Dem leadership is foolish for not using this to start advocating for change in the federal rules. Make Bush veto yet ANOTHER bill to help cancer patience. So much for his "culture of life" crap.
1) I agree with Digby that Antonin Scalia is a huge freaking creep, a hypocrite of the highest order, and the single most important reason that the Democrats' loss last year was a major, major problem (because we simply can't afford any more justices like him).
2) When it comes to states' rights ... I feel that the difference between Jim Crow laws, anti-gay initiatives, and other laws that have identifiable "political minorities" unable to protect themselves politically without relief from the courts or the federal government on the one hand, and the medical marijuana laws on the other (where no such minorities exist), is pretty significant, and is potentially a substantial hole in the entire states' rights argument. I'm not high-falutin' legal mind here, and am pretty much just guessing, but does anyone agree that our drug laws seem to be a pretty clear overreach of federal power in a way that isn't justified by constitutional theories of the protection of the powerless?
3) I have met people in my life who have sampled marijuana, and they are just like you and me, just a little more selfish and hedonistic, and forgetful. I have heard that it can be a very social activity. I forget where I was going with this.
4) I very much believe that medical marijuana is a WINNER issue for Democrats, not just in the West. The congressional Dem leadership is foolish for not using this to start advocating for change in the federal rules. Make Bush veto yet ANOTHER bill to help cancer patience. So much for his "culture of life" crap.
