Web Search powered by Yahoo! SEARCH
A pretty fair article. I'm not one to "debate" issues but want to point a few things out. The author seems to be a logical thinker.
1) The idea that the US Supreme Court has final authority fails on it's own merit. Does the author really think that arguments between the state(s) and the Federal government should be decided by an entity that is part of said Federal Government? That would be like me getting in a fight with a guy and my his mother being the referee...I would lose 99.999% chance, and that is what has happened each time a state takes it to the SCOTUS
2) Does the author really think that 5 unelected, well-connected lawyers who are appointed to a lifetime appointment by the office of the closest thing we have to a dictatorship (the presidency) should have final say in what the law is?
3) Has the author researched the history of marijuana legalization? I would encourage the author and others to look up Gonzales vs. Raich.
The US Supreme Court in fact found mj for medicinal purposes "Unconstitutional" and that ruling still stands today in 2013.
Let all that sink in for a while...if the people want something in a free society of "we the people" they will get it. It might take an irate minority but we will make it happen.