Administration weighs action against states that legalized marijuana
Marijuana use in both states continues to be illegal under the federal Controlled Substances Act. One option is to sue the states on the grounds that any effort to regulate marijuana is pre-empted by federal law. Should the Justice Department prevail, it would raise the possibility of striking down the entire initiatives on the theory that voters would not have approved legalizing the drug without tight regulations and licensing similar to controls on hard alcohol.
Some law enforcement officials, alarmed at the prospect that marijuana users in both states could get used to flouting federal law openly, are said to be pushing for a stern response. But such a response would raise political complications for President Obama because marijuana legalization is popular among liberal Democrats who just turned out to re-elect him.
“It’s a sticky wicket for Obama,” said Bruce Buchanan, a political science professor at the University of Texas at Austin, saying any aggressive move on such a high-profile question would be seen as “a slap in the face to his base right after they’ve just handed him a chance to realize his presidential dreams.”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
I welcome it (I think). The matter of immigration in Arizona isn’t perfectly analogous to marijuana in Washington, but I think people need to witness the federal behemoth stomping all over a state for daring to experiment in federalism.
Jeddite on December 7, 2012 at 1:07 PM
Yeah. Gonna do something about this. (Pause. Inhale. Hold. Exhale.) Yeah. Really gonna. Any pizza left? No? (Pause. Inhale. Hold. Exhale.) Hahahahahahaah choom hahahahaha. Yeah. Gonna……
apostic on December 7, 2012 at 1:09 PM
It will be funny seeing liberal hypocrites argue states rights when it comes to marijuana.
The Notorious G.O.P on December 7, 2012 at 1:10 PM
Why not?
BigGator5 on December 7, 2012 at 1:11 PM
Prohibition fell because of scofflaw states. States should assert themselves against the feds.
Civil and civic disobedience are often required to instigate governmental corrections. That is the American way. What better advocates than American states?
Capitalist Hog on December 7, 2012 at 1:11 PM
Exactly what I was thinking, Jeddite. How dare the people express their will?
John the Libertarian on December 7, 2012 at 1:12 PM
Yep. But try and explain banning abortion in the same terms. Or even right to work.
The same hypocrisy is apparent in the gay-marriage debate.
Capitalist Hog on December 7, 2012 at 1:16 PM
So, Bull Conner and George Wallace had it right after all?
a capella on December 7, 2012 at 1:17 PM
It’s hilarious that people continue to think that Obama will face any political backlash for what he decides to do. They’re not going to blame Mr. Cool, just as they haven’t blamed him for anything else. He’s not responsible for anything, remember?
Besides, he won re-election and isn’t running for anything else, so why would it matter if there is pushback?
changer1701 on December 7, 2012 at 1:17 PM
Why would this administration do anything to stop creating more dumb people? I’ll guess they’ll wag their finger and growl. Kind of like the repubs when pushing against the progressives.
Mimzey on December 7, 2012 at 1:17 PM
My prediction is that the feds will be tasked with collecting the untaxed pot. The VAT infused pot will be the only game in town, in their ideal world.
rw on December 7, 2012 at 1:19 PM
Left and right should find common ground on this one. Clearly the stereotype of “lazy” pot heads who won’t turn out to vote has been exploded in Colorado and Washington. It is time for us to stop this wasteful and useless federal spending on a failed war.
libfreeordie on December 7, 2012 at 1:22 PM
OVERGROW THE GOVERNMENT!
Ben Hur on December 7, 2012 at 1:24 PM
Civil War II
DarkCurrent on December 7, 2012 at 1:26 PM
You’re the one that wants a federal behemoth dictating how everyone lives his life in each of the far reaches of the empire. How about you admit that maybe the federal government should resort to its limited role, allowing the states to be the laboratories of democracy that they were intended to be, instead of dictating one size fits all “fixes” to every minor problem imaginable?
besser tot als rot on December 7, 2012 at 1:27 PM
Oops, its a MJ thread, so the Paulians would certainly weight in. Its amusing to watch them (and other so-called fisc cons) use the concept of liberty to legalize MJ. Truly pathetic.
tommy71 on December 7, 2012 at 1:33 PM
Pass the Cheetos!
dczombie on December 7, 2012 at 1:33 PM
Hmmm … If the potheads voted for libs, BEFORE it was legal (smoking more now, no doubt),
maybe they’ll be manipulatable by the right, next election.
Just tell them it’ll help them, somehow… they won’t have the sense/enough remaining brain cells to know otherwise.
LOL … One can dream.
pambi on December 7, 2012 at 1:34 PM
The MJ will be taken to the White House. I Choom reunion is coming.
Oil Can on December 7, 2012 at 1:35 PM
Bull Connor and George Wallace were notoriously hateful people. That does not diminish their ideas in concept.
States rights arguments are harmed mostly by those delivering the message. The key is to present the concept in a manner (caselaw) that is inescapable.
Capitalist Hog on December 7, 2012 at 1:35 PM
It’s been all over our news in AZ about our first “medical mairijuana” clinic opening. Part of the coverage was someone exploring the effects this could have on young children in the homes of these “medical” marijuana “patients.” Sorry, you should have gotten an answer to that question, along with a lot of others, before you voted this idiotic bill into law.
The ironic thing? They interviewed a “patient” outside the clinic yesterday, and he was delighted not to have to drive quite so far to get his prescription. The bottom line? Medical mairijuana patients were getting their “medicine” without the aid of this bill. We’ve been duped. The bill that we passed is very similar to the one in California. It’s ripe for abuse, and it will be abused by people who just want to get high and complicit doctors who will prescribe the “medicine” without good reason.
JannyMae on December 7, 2012 at 1:36 PM
It’s also interesting that pot will be legal in some circumstances where cigarettes are not. Walk out front of the hospitals now during smoke break in CO and WA and catch a contact high.
Capitalist Hog on December 7, 2012 at 1:38 PM
How can this drug be exempt from the FDA testing all other drugs have to go thru? Especially a potent and psychologically destructive drug that anyone can manufacture with nothing more complicated than a bucket of dirt and a seed?
What is this exemption based on?
Mimzey on December 7, 2012 at 1:41 PM
Well, you potheads voted in droves for this clown. Own it.
CurtZHP on December 7, 2012 at 1:43 PM
So, their message was O.K., it was just their personal hatefullness which was bad? If Todd Akin was, say, a state head of public health and morality, he should be able to force raped women in his state to carry a pregnancy resulting from that rape? Like that?
a capella on December 7, 2012 at 1:48 PM
Who is the “we” you mention? The voters?
John the Libertarian on December 7, 2012 at 1:51 PM
Tobacco products? Although, IIRC, they may have recently been put under the FDA umbrella. I’m not sure about that one.
a capella on December 7, 2012 at 1:51 PM
This is an utterly stupid analysis. Did you forget the sarc tag? Or are you just trying to express a sharp distance between yourself and their philosophies.
I suspect that you will not find a conservative man who refutes bigotry as overtly as I do. But that doesn’t mean I ignore sound ideas or bedrock-ideals because the messenger is tainted.
Todd Akin has bigger problems than you’re admitting with his policy-platform. I’d take George Wallace’s plea for states rights over Akin’s quest to levy religious sanctions from Congress any day.
Capitalist Hog on December 7, 2012 at 2:01 PM
@Jenny May
You’re a nanny-stater plain and simple. The “for the children” plea is atrocious and useless. You cannot, I repeat, you can not square that line of reasoning with conservatism. It is is your own personal moral crusade.
You’re probably a great neighbor and citizen. But you have no idea what you believe apparently.
Capitalist Hog on December 7, 2012 at 2:05 PM
Like the “war on poverty”. You are mind numbingly stupid. I weep for your students.
jawkneemusic on December 7, 2012 at 2:09 PM
You don’t understand. “State’s rights” was the rationalization for Jim Crow and its the basis for Goldwater’s opposition to the Civil Rights Act. Goldwater and Connor may have had different tones, but they both believed that Jim Crow should have remained legal based upon the idea of state’s rights. Its not the delivery.
Rather, the argument should be about bodily liberty, your right to put whatever you want or restrict what you don’t into your body.
libfreeordie on December 7, 2012 at 2:23 PM
The only way MJ is a federal issue is if states where it is legal become sources for the illegal market in states that have not legalized MJ. Even then, the issue is interdicting smuggling, not the fact that MJ is legal in XYZ state.
Sekhmet on December 7, 2012 at 2:30 PM
Which will happen sure as night turns to day. So,..what then? More DEA agents to police MJ movement to and from the legalized states. More cops. More expense. More traffic pull overs. Groovy!
a capella on December 7, 2012 at 2:38 PM
Scalia said otherwise in probably his most disappointing (anti-federalism) opinion.
besser tot als rot on December 7, 2012 at 2:46 PM
What about food? What about the fruits of your labor? Nice to see that you understand the concept, but you only want it to apply when it is something that you want. Something that impacts you. Hypocrite.
besser tot als rot on December 7, 2012 at 2:48 PM
Constitutionally there is nothing the feds can do about it, but we seem to be in a post-constitutional epoch.
Axion on December 7, 2012 at 3:08 PM
Whilst I am not a fan of marijuana I applaud Washington state for doing this. I hope there is a full blown confrontation over states rights.
Somehow I don’t see Barky and Holder going after a deep blue state and drugs at the same time. Now, a red state and immigration? Well we know what happens there, abrogation of federal law by the federal government themselves.
The statists in both parties in DC will be 90% in support of any effort to punish Washington – they just won’t favor the optics.
CorporatePiggy on December 7, 2012 at 3:09 PM
I’ve often thought that what you are suggesting is the only way out of the fed’s iron grip. If the governors would unite against the feds we could get our freedom back.
Axion on December 7, 2012 at 3:18 PM
All Bush’s Fault.
Del Dolemonte on December 7, 2012 at 3:22 PM