Prompted by “Largely without merit”: http://www.drugwarrant.com/2014/12/largely-without-merit/
“Colorado has undermined the United States Constitution, and I hope the U.S. Supreme Court will uphold our constitutional principles.” – Nebraska and Oklahoma
Two states are suing Colorado for legalizing cannabis, and that statement regarding our Constitution strikes hard.
For some politically charged reason (I assume), you will sadly never hear (read, etc.) this response by anyone but yours truly these days, but it truly contains an essential fact that I will elaborate upon in a later ‘HUSH for Rush’ post against the so-called constitutional basis for the “war on [some] drugs”.
Colorado has not undermined the U.S. Constitution. As ruled by our Supreme Court, the sole constitutional foundation for the war on some drugs is the Commerce Clause (“To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes”). Combined with the intent of law (to avoid abusive and state-sanctioned favoritism laws against a healthy interstate commerce for a healthier national economy), there is no way our Supreme Court can interpret (their sole duty by constitutional law) the Commerce Clause to lawfully support the war on some drugs (e.g. banning the mere possession of a certain plant in your hand).
Why nationally jump through all of the tough hoops necessary to secure a constitutional amendment for Alcohol Prohibition, if the Commerce Clause suffices?
I have the answer to that question, but suffice it to say today that our Supreme Court clearly (i.e. based upon the whole truth and nothing but) illegally redefined the Commerce Clause decades ago, and enough people within the true highest court of the land (the court of public opinion) have yet to press our “public servants” on this key legal front to right this wrong — one that logically and apparently unknowingly results in terrible consequences against all Americans.
Take away that illegal redefining, and the consistency required for credibility effectively insists upon repealing the Controlled Substances Act in favor of a thorough and effective educational approach that addresses abuse in any of its many forms — especially the abuse of law — logically the worst form of abuse due to its mainly broad scope of destruction, and the form of abuse that our nation was supposed to be constitutionally established against (but is not due to pre-American conservatism still dominating over two centuries later against the truly progressive/liberal/even-conservative and revolutionary unalienable right to liberty), according to the U.S. Declaration of Independence.
Perfectly upholding that right (albeit perhaps necessarily combined with modern sanity) would have meant instantly ending slavery, granting women equal rights, preventing laws against the LGBT community, preventing laws against certain drug users, preventing laws against people not abusing anything (professionally or not), and forced our nation to scientifically define (and refine) harm for the sake of judicial accuracy (i.e. corruption reduction in all areas of American society).