cannabisnews.com: Federal Drug Laws Take Precedent 





Federal Drug Laws Take Precedent 
Posted by FoM on July 02, 2000 at 21:30:58 PT
By Mark Souder 
Source: Journal Gazette
An article appearing in Friday's Journal Gazette ("Souder battles medical-marijuana laws") failed to make clear an important point about recent state initiatives that have attempted to decriminalize marijuana for so-called "medical" use. According to the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, states cannot pass legislation that is contradictory to existing federal law. 
Therefore, for all practical purposes, laws to relax state penalties for drug use can have no effect. A bill I have introduced makes clear as a technical matter that the longstanding federal laws against the use of marijuana and narcotic drugs take precedence over efforts to change those laws in the states. In other words, California cannot permit marijuana use because it is illegal under federal law. Well-funded activists have undertaken a repulsive effort to legalize drugs in the name of sick people, when legal means already exist to administer the effective component of marijuana in pill form. The representative of the National Organization for Reform of Marijuana Laws who was quoted in the article gave the impression that groups like his are truly concerned about the ability of ill people to ease their pain, when in fact, NORML's sole mission in all its years of existence has been the legalization of marijuana for everyone. Too many Americans' lives are ruined by illegal drugs. Those who seek to legalize this poison certainly shouldn't be allowed to use sick people as an excuse. Mark Souder Member of Congress E-Mail Staffhttp://www.jg.net/jg/newspaper/staff.htmContact Information:http://www.jg.net/jg/newspaper/contact.htmPublished: Sunday July 2, 2000Copyright: The Journal GazetteRelated Articles:NORMLhttp://www.norml.org/Souder Battles Medical-Marijuana Laws http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread6252.shtmlJust an Excuse for Peddling Pot http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread6172.shtmlLegalize Pot? How Absurd http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread6156.shtmlLegalization of Pot is a Matter of Privacy http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread6111.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #9 posted by Wankatya on June 17, 2001 at 18:26:52 PT:
MJ illegal becuz of logging actually
Hypocrisy and prejudice are always present in most things humans do. The reason marijuana was made illegal initially was under pressure from other industries, such as logging, that could not compete with the suspected future of hemp. The Constitution, as everyone knows, is written on hemp paper. 5 acres of hemp can produce as much paper as about 20 acres of Doug Fir (big evergreen tree). I do agree with the spirit of this comment but I think it is important to know that anyone working for legalization of any part of the hemp plant is going up against entrenched corporate interests. Remember Tucker and his car? Detroit killed it and him. Same thing would and does happen if and when people go up against the logging trust.In addition, hemp threatens the food industries, the synthetic medicines industries, the textile industries and so on.Just my 7.5 grams,Wankatya
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by MikeEEEEE on July 03, 2000 at 18:30:31 PT
OPECkerHeads & Elected Officals
This is what one member of Congress thinks? I'd like to thank him for showing us what an idiot he really is.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #7 posted by tommyb on July 03, 2000 at 09:53:57 PT:
souder and states rights
just to cite the declaration of independence.when the colonists spoke of the King of Great-Brittain'shistory of repeated injuries and usurpations...He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most whole-someand necessary for the public good.(The same way our gov'thas neglected the effects on the family when they lock up a harmless cannabis smoker. And the negative effects of being thrown in jail has on a persons career and credibility far out weigh the effects of smoking cannabis.)...For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with Power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever. (In the same way our mutated form of the original colonists government has repeatedly prevented states that have voted to decriminalize cannabis use on various terms of use, from achieving federal compliance.)...He has consrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive onthe high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the Executioners of their Friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands. (Our government of today forces those they have captured because they smoke cannabis to "narc" or give up the names and locations of others whopart-take in the responsible use of cannabis, in exchange for Freedom.)(Finnaly...)We the People of the United States in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranqulity, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.(Until cannabis is legalized the blessings of liberty to ourselves have not been secured.)
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #6 posted by meff on July 03, 2000 at 08:56:02 PT:
Souder uneducated about mj
"Those who seek to legalize this poison..." Souder shouldrealize people have been using mj for thousands of years. Sure smoking mj posses some medical risks for a small percentage of users, however, so do many other things that we regularly ingest.We do not need this kind of moralistic crusader telling us what we can and can not put into our bodies.Souder needs to do some research on why mj was prohibited in the first place. It had nothing to do with public health(the AMA opposed mj prohibition), and had everything to do with prejudice and hyprocracy.Let us not let these people's lies go unchanllenged anymore.Peace.jb
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #5 posted by Tom on July 03, 2000 at 08:32:21 PT
States do NOT Have to Enforce Federal Laws!!!
Sorry Prostitute (Congressman) Souder, but states areNOT required to enforce federal laws!Therefore, if a state wants to repeal Prohibition,it is free to do so. At that point, no state/localagencies, and no state/local funds, can be used toenforce the federal government's Prohibition. Atthat point, only federal tax dollars and federalagencies can enforce Prohibition.And that's too bad for prohibitionists like Souder...Because virtually all drug laws (with the exceptionof very, very large quantities) are enforced at thestate and local level! The federal government doesNOT have the financial resources, or the personnel,to enforce Prohibition at the state and local level!But I wouldn't excpect a Pea-Brained Prohibitionistlike Prostitute (Congressman) Souder to understandthis. He's not even capable of understanding theConstitution, The Bill of Rights, or Democracy!So sorry, Souder! The so-called "War on Drugs"is over... DRUGS WON! Now, it's time to launchWar on Prohibitionists! :)Most any night, you know where I can be found...Yep, stompin' some prohibitionist's head into the ground!So keep the faith, cuz in hempsters you can trust...We won't give up till the last prohibitionist bites the dust!
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #4 posted by kaptinemo on July 03, 2000 at 05:28:49 PT:
So democracy itself does not matter?
Evidently MISTER (I won't use the honorific of 'Honorable Congressman' because he so plainly *isn't*) Souder has forgotten something. Namely, that he holds his position not due to Federal influence but because of a State election - a democratic election - in which he was voted into power. In the same kind of exercise of democratic franchise, the people of the various States who have passed their MMJ inititiatives into *laws* fully expect that the Federal government take notice of their new *laws* regarding this matter and accede to the will of the people in those States. To do otherwise is to invalidate ALL elections - including the one that put Souder where he is today.Care to step down from your high position, Mr. Souder? Or at least, *read* the document you swore an oath to protect and defend? Particularly the 10th Amemndment you so-called conservatives love so much.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #3 posted by alby on July 03, 2000 at 04:06:32 PT:
Pecker-Neck !
 Say, someone tell me please.Do any of these fellows in congress and senate EVER pull their head out of their a** long enough to see whats going on OR has it just come to the point that the PEOPLE don't matter when it comes to power grabs and money....What a jerk
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by Dankhank on July 02, 2000 at 22:45:32 PT:
E-Mail the crazy man
To this man, 2,000,000 in jail is not enough ...He wants to lock up more, and take education money from drug "criminals."Nowhere in the pending legislation does it say that you could lose your education money if you kill someone, or rape someone, or do any violent act. ONLY IF YOU DO DRUGS AND GET CAUGHT!go to my links page and get his e-mail address, and write him ... especially if you live in his district.From Denver for the next week or so ...Peace ...
Lots o Links
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by CongressmanSuet on July 02, 2000 at 22:07:18 PT:
Mark Souder, asshole in congress...
would have been more like it. Clutch to your technicalities, but the simple fact is that the people have, and are speaking. By throwing out the "pill" crap, you are just making it clear how uninformed and pigheaded you really are. Obviously, you have no idea of government by the people for the people is all about. We are speaking, and we are being heard.
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment


Name: Optional Password: 
E-Mail: 
Subject: 
Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]
Link URL: 
Link Title: