Why did Obama and Holder sue Arizona, but not California? Drug laws are a Federal issue right?

by **norwyn** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 10:46 pm

No. Drug laws are not a Federal issue. Never have been. Federal government has no legal authority over MJ or intra-state commerce. Period.

Just because federal prohibition has been going on for decades does not make it any less illegal.

@brown950 --- no, you're wrong. Try learning about the topic before sharing your opinion. State law always trumps Federal law except in the areas where the Federal government is explicitly GRANTED power by the Constitution.

That's why states have the ability to nullify federal laws. Until recently, there hasn't been any talk of it, but you will probably see it happen with the healthcare bill, and then hopefully with a lot of other illegal federal laws.

by **jan46** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 10:56 pm

One was in direct conflict with a citizen's right to privacy and infringed upon a group of people's rights who were able to stand up and object. You may not agree with them - but they were there and felt under attack because of their ethnicity.

Besides the right wing bible thumpers who is being harmed by California's decriminilization???

The first aimed to imprison millions and detain millions more.
The other prevents idiotic arrests and imprisonment.

Seriously you don't see the difference and expect anyone to respect your opinion?????

okay buddy.

by **danil70** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 10:58 pm

Prop 19 hasn't been passed yet but Holder has made it clear that when (if) it does, they will not recognize it as such.

[But Attorney General Eric Holder released a statement last week saying the federal government will "vigorously enforce the controlled substances act."]

by **kalvin71** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:07 pm

Prop 19 hasn't been passed yet but Holder has made it clear that when (if) it does, they will not recognize it as such.

[But Attorney General Eric Holder released a statement last week saying the federal government will "vigorously enforce the controlled substances act."]

Playing politics, obviously.

I live in the cesspool of California. I tell you, I can't wait until the same people that whined and cried about a state (AZ) trying to make a new law in regards to immigration control because they should be following federal laws complain about the fact that the federal government won't recognize this state's law. It will be great!

Voted YES on 19!

by **maddox** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:18 pm

Prop 19 hasn't been passed yet but Holder has made it clear that when (if) it does, they will not recognize it as such.

[But Attorney General Eric Holder released a statement last week saying the federal government will "vigorously enforce the controlled substances act."]

Playing politics, obviously.

I live in the cesspool of California. I tell you, I can't wait until the same people that whined and cried about a state (AZ) trying to make a new law in regards to immigration control because they should be following federal laws complain about the fact that the federal government won't recognize this state's law. It will be great!

Voted YES on 19!

There is already precedent for this in terms of drug laws. I work in pharmacy and you have two sets of laws to deal with state and federal. Rule of thumb is that you always have to obey they one that is more stringent. (i.e. State law states you must keep controlled substance records for 3 years and federal law states 5 years...then you keep them for 5 years)

by **cumhea** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:21 pm

Prop 19 hasn't been passed yet but Holder has made it clear that when (if) it does, they will not recognize it as such.

[But Attorney General Eric Holder released a statement last week saying the federal government will "vigorously enforce the controlled substances act."]

Playing politics, obviously.

I live in the cesspool of California. I tell you, I can't wait until the same people that whined and cried about a state (AZ) trying to make a new law in regards to immigration control because they should be following federal laws complain about the fact that the federal government won't recognize this state's law. It will be great!

Voted YES on 19!

There is already precedent for this in terms of drug laws. I work in pharmacy and you have two sets of laws to deal with state and federal. Rule of thumb is that you always have to obey they one that is more stringent. (i.e. State law states you must keep controlled substance records for 3 years and federal law states 5 years...then you keep them for 5 years)

They are broke no chance for any money...

Do you know what happened this week back in 1850, in California?

California became a state.
The State had no electricity.
The State had no money.
Almost everyone spoke Spanish.
There were gunfights in the streets.

Basically, it was just like California today, except the women had real **** and the men didn't hold hands.

by **eadweald71** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:39 pm

Obama didn't sue anybody - and neither did Holder. Just more right wing lies from FOX FAKE "News" - the Lie Leader.

Obama has an actual Justice Dept which does actual Justice stuff - unlike Baby Bush and Gonzolas, the political Justice guy. Don't get crooked repuiblican political government mixed up with legitimate government.

by **adare** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:53 pm

California never passed any discriminatory laws besides prop 8, which I would have supported a lawsuit over as a Californian resident.

by **lazaro94** » Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:01 am

one the law hasnt passed yet so there is nothing to sue over two obama has already said the feds are not going after marijuana offenses

by **yehudi** » Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:05 am

California hasn't legalized it yet. If they do I'm sure the lawsuits will be forthcoming.

Advertisments:

Sponsor Links: