The Supreme Court's opinion in Gonzales v. Raich is available in pdf format
<http://rightrainbow.com/archives/supreme_court/>; O'Connor, Rehnquist and
Thomas dissented. From the dissent by Justice Thomas:
Diane Monson and Angel Raich use marijuana that has never been bought or
sold, that has never crossed state lines, and that has had no demonstrable
effect on the national market for marijuana. If Congress can regulate this
under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually anything -- and
the Federal Government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers.
...[L]ocal cultivation and consumption of marijuana is not "Commerce . . .
among the several States." U. S. Const., Art. I, �8, cl. 3. By holding that
Congress may regulate activity that is neither interstate nor commerce
under the Interstate Commerce Clause, the Court abandons any attempt to
enforce the Constitution's limits on federal power.
Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court was faced with a list of
previous cases that ruled that interstate commerce can include purely
intrastate activity! From Gonzales v. Raich (formerly Raich v
Ashcroft): "Congress' power to regulate purely local activities that
are part of an economic class of activities that have a substantial
effect on interstate commerce is firmly established." "Substantial"
might be questionable in this case, but the Court decided (correctly
IMHO) that it was.
So, the Feds nailed this case...and are getting ready for more. The
national drivers' license is just around the corner, and "interstate
commerce" will be applied again should anyone object.
There is a slew of Federal legislation coming down the pike that
chips away at "states' rights" (Amendments 9th and 10th). Couple
that with Mayor Gavin's attitude that if people do not do the right
thing, then "the government" must step in to take care of the
situation (see Jawj Greenwald's post), then we can see we have a
fight in our Libertarian hands. It would be great if we could commit
ourselves to starting some kind of rotating editorial writing which
we could distribute to the press, etc. Or commit to make use of the
new CALP Editorial Exchange posted by Rich Newell.
Marcy
--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, "Dr. Michael R. Edelstein"
<dredelstein@t...> wrote:
From: "Williamson Evers" <Evers@H...>
To: <Recipient list suppressed>
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 1:14 PM
Subject: medical marijuana/commerce clause/Justice Thomas's dissent
The Supreme Court's opinion in Gonzales v. Raich is available in
pdf
format
<http://rightrainbow.com/archives/supreme_court/>; O'Connor,
Rehnquist
and
Thomas dissented. From the dissent by Justice Thomas:
Diane Monson and Angel Raich use marijuana that has never been
bought
or
sold, that has never crossed state lines, and that has had no
demonstrable
effect on the national market for marijuana. If Congress can
regulate