Re:FDA approves first marijuana-derived drug and it may spar...
by gremlinsinc on Tuesday June 26, 2018 @09:43PM
(#17405216)
Actually, IIRC/IANAL, SINCE recreational use is legal in D.C., federally the government's hands are tied, because I believe what is legal in D.C. is legal in all federal jurisdictions (except where state laws says otherwise), so Federally, I believe Marijuana is no longer prosecutable per se, I could be wrong -- but states that still ban it can prosecute since it's their state law.
Re:FDA approves first marijuana-derived drug and it may spar...
by taejo on Wednesday June 27, 2018 @05:44AM
(#17406897)
Sounds like a legal urban legend.
Re:FDA approves first marijuana-derived drug and it may spar...
by gremlinsinc on Wednesday June 27, 2018 @12:09PM
(#17409320)
Maybe, I heard it on here, and they probably were 'IANAL' too.
Re:FDA approves first marijuana-derived drug and it may spar...
by kevin_b_er on Tuesday June 26, 2018 @11:41AM
(#17401474)
The supremacy clause combined with interstate commerce clause.
Because any action might have a ripple-of-butterfly-wings effect on commerce, the federal law can claim interstate commerce would be affected. So it can supersede many state laws. You'll find various claims of "State's Rights" where politically convenient vs supremacy clause where convenient depending on political scores.
No, by the "Supremacy clause" of the Constitution.
> Could federal-level law enforcement theoretically charge someone in a cannabis-legal state for drug offenses?
Yes. Because people interact much more with local police than federal police, it makes a big difference whether or not the local police enforce these laws. The Obama administration also chose not to enforce federal marijuana laws in states with less restrictive state laws. But both of these relate to enforcement rather than legality.