I read somewhere that the Feds can still bust people even if they’ve been prescribed cannabis legally. What’s the constitutional position? Do Federal laws overrule State laws where drugs are concerned? In which case what’s the point of states like California legalizing medical cannabis?
Laws made by Congress to carry out Congress’ ennumerated powers under the Constitution do override state laws. Article VI of the Constitution declares that document, and “…Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof…” to be the supreme law of the land.
So there’s no question that Congress believed it had the constitutional authority to criminalize marijuana, even though a state may have made it explicitly legal. The Controlled Substances Act forbids the cultivation and possession of marijuana, even in states that permit “medicinal” use, and even by state-sanctioned facilities.
But is it constitutional? Does the constitution give that power to the federal government?
The Supreme Court says it is. In Gonzales v. Raich, they found that Congress’ Commerce Clause authority includes the power to prohibit the local cultivation and use of marijuana, even if it is in compliance with state law.
Critics of the decision point out that such an expansive reading of the Commerce Clause gives the federal government power to regulate almost anything that can be bought and sold, and complain that such was never the intention of the Commerce Clause.
Does this give the local authorities the ability (or obligation) to enforce federal drug laws? Like, if a city PO finds legal (statewise) pot during a traffic stop?
No, there’s no requirement for local authorities to enforce federal law.
Now, the feds might decide to condition funding on such enforcement… “No locality shall receive federal highway funding if it has a policy of not enforcing marijuana infractions …”
But thus far, they haven’t.
The state law is instantly effective, when a federal law is no longer in effect for whatever reason.
Even if the federal law is still in effect, there just aren’t that many feds there to enforce it.
The states doing things their own way as a “test ground” has a strong tradition too. A few states’ legalization movement might help bolster the national case, since people can point to the states’ results and show that all hell hasn’t broken loose. That said, perhaps CA wasn’t the best example of non-loosely-broken-hell to use. 
<hijack>Opponents of medical marijuana (and marijuana legalization generally) like to say that there is rampant abuse of medical marijuana by patients who receive prescriptions for dubious ailments. Is there any truth to that?</hijack>
Thanks,
Rob
We talked about the legal issues here: Supreme Court rules against medical marijuana - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board
Indeed, homeboy. Here in Santa Barbara there are three or four medical MJ shops open for business operating without any problems (although one was recently robbed.) You wouldn’t know what they were from the street because the signs in the windows are subtle. They can smell pretty skunky from the street though. In San Francisco on the other hand, the shops have huge neon marijuana leaves in the windows.
Yes, in my opinion. I know three people who are or have been 'scripted. The actual pot is in the back of the shop behind a counter and door like a doctor’s office. You can’t go in back without a card. If you tell them at the window that you need a card, they’ll give you a list of local doctors to see. These docs are activists or opportunists who will give pretty much anyone a card for a $250 office visit. Just tell them that you reoccurring headaches or cramps. Of the three people I know, one had a legitimate medical reason and the other two just wanted an easy way to score weed.
I’m a physician who believes there is a role for medical marijuana.
But having said that, I am appalled at the so-called medical uses it is being put to in California, by dubious practitioners, for ill-informed or outright dishonest patients.
Instead of being used to fight nausea from chemotherapy or wasting syndromes like advanced AIDS, it’s being used for treatment of things like fibromyalgia, dysmenorrhea (bad menstrual cramps), musculo-skeletal backaches, chronic headaches, and elevated intra-ocular pressure (a real bogus use, it’s crappy at lowering eye pressure for longer than an hour or so, and to be effective, requires smoking it 24/7.)
I think that the cause of proper use of medical marijuana is being set back by the way they’re doing it on the west coast.
Sounds like a good plan to me! California, here I come.
I find I agree with you [although my personal take is that it is the equivalent of a shot and a cigarette and should be legal but that is neither here nor there]
I find that my combination of meds tends to give me chronic mild nausea [about half of what I had on chemo. It ranges from being functional and really queasy to stopping just below vomit level … the kind where you stay as still as possible and avoid thinking about eating or drinking, but smells can make you dry hurk] Would something like that help? I really like what the Byetta and metformin do for the diabetes, and the indocin and colchichine keep the pseudo gout flares to a tolerable level, but the nausea … OY.
Had California been ably to openly support this without federal laws in place, it could be handled better now, to prevent unscrupulous use.