Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roachboy
but nothing good in this direction will originate from congress so long as tha far right has the role that it has. and i am sure the supremes knew this.
|
Not entirely surprised that you would write this, but I wanted you to be aware of two pieces of legislation pending in congress as we speak:
The Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment would bar the Justice Department from raiding the homes of patients who use marijuana in states where it's legal
and
Another bill, the "Truth in Trials Act," would let juries know when a defendant in federal court is being prosecuted for marijuana-related crimes in states where the drug is legal.
These from "far right" controlled houses of congress? Amazing.
It's funny how the fringe left likes to paint Thomas as nothing but a water boy for Scalia. Once again, and as usual, incorrect. Kind off like the "far right" hyperbole of the the legislatives branches leanings.
Ustwo, as usual, has painted the clearest picture of this issue, Scalia's anomoly not withstanding. The liberal court sided with the federal government, while the conservative court sided with federalism. Federalism lost in this issue and liberal activism prevailed.
A birght and shining star of the opinion, imho, was a footnote offered by the majority's author, to wit:
Stevens, in footnote 37, suggests that "evidence proferred by respondents . . . if found credible after trial, would cast serious doubt on the accuracy of the findings that require marijuana to be listed in Schedule I."
It has been theorized that this is a signal to lower courts to give serious consideration to any medical marijuana proponents seeking a review of a DEA reclassification hearing under the current Controlled Substances Act, and a warning to the DEA to take those arguments seriously.
If nothing else I take from this opinion two things. When the federal government can possibly exert control over it's citizens the left will OK it, since this is the only avenue available for the left to advance any of it's initiatives...and Scalia is no friend to any defense attorney, and is very unpredictable in his interpretation of federalism.
It was also intersting to read some liberal justices gibberish about how the citizens can use the ballot box to manifest changes with respect to maryjane and its medicinal use while this very issue is the direct result of voters having a say in the matter.
-bear