There's no need to worry, the Feds simply do not have the resources to enforce Federal law in the 41 States, 1 District and 2 US Territories which have recognized at least limited valid medicinal utility. What's my point? Under Federal law there is no differentiation between cannabis as medicine and cannabis for enjoyment.
Doesn't it bother people that in the 2 decades since California voters approved the Compassionate Use Act that every lame court action prosecuted arguing Federal preemption was filed by State or local authorities? How about the fact that those lame arguments were laughed out of the appellate Courts?
My advice is to familiarizing yourself with the anti-commandeering doctrine detailed in State of New York v. United States 505 U.S. 144 (1992). It was re-affirmed and broadened in Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997)
A couple of interesting statistics were recently released. In 2015 reported sales of cannabis in Colorado came up $4 million short of $1 billion. That means the State collected $130-something million in gross tax revenue. Total gross revenue reported increased by just under 42.5%.
For 2015 the Colorado State Patrol reports that rather than increasing by just under 42.5 percent, the total number of drivers arrested by the CSP for being cannabis addled and under the influence of another substance of impairment fell by 1.3 percent from 674 to 665. Drivers arrested solely for being cannabis addled also did not increase by just under 42.5 percent, but declined just under 2% from 354 to 347.
The total number of DUI arrests made by the CSP was just under 22% higher in 2014 than in 2015. Total arrests declined by exactly 1000 from 5,546 in 2014 to 4,546 in 2015. Where did those 1000 drunk drivers go?
It's beyond absurd to think that there's any possibility of State level medicinal cannabis patient protection laws being overturned by the federal Courts. California's Compassionate Use Act (CUA) is in its 16th year and has been in front of the SCOTUS 4 times with the issue of preemption being the basis of at least the last 2. The law remains on the books.
Those people thinking that the Federal cavalry is going to ride into town any day now should ask themselves why 3 consecutive Presidential administrations haven't even bothered to challenge these laws.
P.S. There were in fact Several States which repealed their drinking alcohol prohibition laws before the 21st Amendment was ratified in 1933. New York was the first and they didn't wait long, repealing in the early 1920s. Massachusetts repealed in 1930 through a ballot initiative and California did likewise in 1932.
All content © Copyright 2017, The Colorado Springs Independent
Website powered by Foundation