I am teaching the concept of federalism to my students. We are examining a recent case in California where the County of San Diego is suing to overturn a law (proposition 215) that allows for the medical use of marijuana. Marijuana is listed as a schedule 1 narcotic (most dangerous classification) by the federal government. I am not debating the merits of the law one way or another. I am interested in finding out how the federal law that bans the use of marijuana is resolved with the state law in CA that allows for the use of medical marijuana. How does the federal government punish a person for doing something that is legal in the State of California? I am sorry if this is confusing, but I am trying to understand it myself.
2006-11-17 08:42:38 · 8 answers · asked by williambahl 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
GREAT QUESTION !!! I may not have your answer, but I think I can point you in the right direction.
Where a STATE STATUTE is in place, it SUPERSEDES a LOCAL ORDINANCE, and so on up the line, if there is a FEDERAL LAW in conflict with a STATE STATUTE, the FEDERAL LAW then SUPERSEDES the statute.
What are "Federal" Marijuana Laws?
Federal marijuana laws are the laws that the federal government enacts to criminalize marijuana possession, sale, and cultivation. Each U.S. state also passes their own marijuana laws, but when these laws are in conflict with the federal rules, the federal rules control. Traditionally drug crimes are prosecuted at the state level. But because some states have decriminalized marijuana crimes (such as for medicinal purposes), federal prosecutions for marijuana possession/sale/cultivation are becoming more common.
The distinction is important, because while many states have rather lax laws concerning marijuana use, the Federal Government has some extremely strict penalties, some of which involve decades of jail time.
But I am Licensed By My State to Grow Marijuana for Medicinal Purposes...
Because the Federal Government does not recognize the legality of "medical marijuana," if you are prosecuted under federal law you will not be able to use any defense involving it. This means that even if your state has explicitly authorized you to grow marijuana, federal agents can still arrest you and you can be sentenced according to the guidelines above (and indeed this has happened). So if you grow marijuana legally in your state, you should contact a criminal lawyer about your rights, even if you haven't been arrested. An experienced criminal attorney will be able to explain all the risks in greater detail, as well as the complex interaction of federal and state laws in this issue.
Here is a site that will explain all that and deals directly with the MJ issues.
2006-11-17 09:23:21 · answer #1 · answered by Len_NJ 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It will usually come up in the form of punishments on the state itself, not on the people. Like when the federal government wanted to establish the legal drinking age at 21, they withheld funds for interstate highways if a state did not comply and make their legal drinking age 21.
If I lived in California and I have Glaucoma and use Marijuana, and federal agents bust me for felony possession, I would appeal and appeal all the way up the United Stated Supreme Court. If the law goes all the way up to the Supreme Court, they will then declare if it is constitutionally a state right or not. If the court decides it is up to California, the Federal government must bite the bullet. As you know, there are certain things that are explicitly assigned to the federal government and everything else is up to the States.
2006-11-17 08:46:45 · answer #2 · answered by tiger_lilly33186 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Fed. law trumps state law. That is why there are so many things federal law doesn't even address, leaving it up to the states. If they passed this law, then the wording must have been such to try to bypass the federal law (like you can use certain illicit drugs for medical uses - e.g. morphine).
States can't pick and choose which federal laws to follow. That's part of why the Articles of Conferation didn't work out - not a strong enough federal government.
2006-11-17 08:50:16 · answer #3 · answered by Phoenix, Wise Guru 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am a California attorney. My cousin, also a California attorney, just won an appeal in California Sixth Appellate District dealing with this exact issue.
Contact me through this site and I'll send a PDF file containing the court's very lengthy decision. It will show exactly where the law is on this right now and the very real problems that your question presents.
2006-11-17 10:58:38 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It isn't resolved at all, the federal govt. wins. A few years ago here in Idaho and a few other states along with Tommy Chong, the feds decided to enforce the anti paraphernalia laws & without warning of any type head shops here were busted and the owners/employees were sent to jail, Tommy went to jail for the same reason in the same sting opperation. One of the head shops that got busted here been in business for over 20 years and I know of one guy still sitting in jail over this.
The feds do what they,want it isn't right it isn't upholding our constitutional rights. It was legal in Idaho to sell water pipes etc... untill Opperation Pipe Dream. So i guess the answer is it dosen't matter if it is legal in your state or not the feds can change that before you wake up tomorrow.
2006-11-17 09:03:02 · answer #5 · answered by fuzzylilhippiechick 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Federal law trumps state law. That's why the FBI and DEA have been sending more storm troopers to CA ever since prop 215 was enacted.
2006-11-17 09:22:33 · answer #6 · answered by Manny 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not resolvable as you have well pointed out. The law will not stand up to federal, legal scrutiny unless the FDA relaxes it control of Marijuana.
In my mind, there is no beneficial medically accepted use for marijuana.
2006-11-17 08:53:10 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
State cops can't bust you for using the correct way allowed
the feds can...they wouldn't waste the time unless the stats laws were being broken and the feds laws then no
only if moving weight would interest them
2006-11-17 08:48:19 · answer #8 · answered by buzzy360comecme 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋