SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: LindyBill who wrote (118960)6/8/2005 7:30:33 PM
From: D. Long   of 793883
 
This one is pretty baffling, but expected. Transporting mary jane in interstate commerce is forbidden by Congress under Commerce Clause authority. So the stuff doesn't (legally) move in interstate commerce, so there shouldn't be any source for the feds regulating it.

The wheat case mentioned in the article, Wickard v. Filburn, held local economic activity could be regulated because of its "cumulative" effects. The local farmer consuming some of his own wheat lowers the demand for wheat substantially when combined with the consumption of other farmers, defeating the policy of Congress to raise wheat prices and effecting interstate commerce. Hence, CC violation.

Since there is no interstate commerce in marijuana, the local economic effects of growing it have no impact on interstate commerce. There's no substantial effect on interstate commerce channels, instrumentalities, or any of that other jive. So really it just comes down to maintaining drug prohibition.

Derek
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News