Medical Marijuana Prohibition: Having Your Cake and Eating It, Too
The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is responsible for enforcing the nation’s Federal drug laws. Under these laws, for practical intents and purposes, when it comes to medical marijuana there is no ambiguity: Any and all forms of the plant, Cannabis sativa L., are prohibited by the Federal criminal code.
The Supreme Court of the United States has interpreted this to mean that the “distribution” and “manufacture” of medical marijuana has been totally prohibited by Congress. Though it is an open question whether substantive due process protects the right of an individual patient to possess cannabis for medical use, even under current Federal law, it is clear—crystal clear—that the Court thinks Congress is in control of the drug policy in the United States of America.
Common sense would indicate that a limited government of enumerated powers could not punish the private, non-commercial medical use of marijuana, since the enumeration of Federal powers via Article I, section 8, of the United States Constitution does not include “health” or “medical care” or “drugs” among them—the ability to “provide for the general welfare” does not, according to common sense, include the ability to punish people for following the advice of their doctor. Neither does it include the wholly intrastate possession of a non-commercial plant as one of Congress’ domains of authority; however, this inconvenience has not prevented a Wickered Court from terrorizing all future Courts from not finding such congressional authority there.
This tyrannical jurisprudence has provided cover for some members of Congress to blame the Court for the prohibition of medical marijuana. For example, representative Susan Davis (D-SD) has put her support of medical marijuana “on the record,” yet her only action is to “hope” for the “chance” that future “scientific” research will persuade the Court to recognize the legitimacy of medical marijuana.
If members of Congress believe drug policy is set by the courts, while the courts maintain that it is set by Congress, then what are the People supposed to do? How can future research yield promising results when the government will not even allow such research to take place? What can be done in an environment where “science” is ignored, as it was in the Food and Drug Administration’s recent claim that “smoked” marijuana has no known medical value (despite a 1999 Federal-led study that concluded exactly otherwise)?
The Court and the Congress—insofar as each has either found authority where none exists, and/or ignored authority that does in fact exist—lack common sense regarding medical marijuana, which not surprisingly has encouraged the DEA to also take an inconsistent stance on the matter. On the one hand, the DEA actively advocates for the continuance of medical marijuana prohibition, i.e., the status quo. On the other hand, the DEA also publicly promises to avoid the “harassment” of legitimate patients who use marijuana for medical purposes and recognizes the right of certain companies—and the Federal bureaucracy itself!—to possess, manufacture, and distribute marijuana or its derivatives. “We only go after the really, really big and really, really bad guys,” says the DEA. “We do not harass sick people.”
Ah, that’s so human—to try to have one’s cake and eat it, too. The DEA, like an unrestrained child, wants what it wants, i.e., its current level of funding and likely future increases of funding. However, at the same time, the DEA also wants to be good, so it cannot help but acknowledge the obvious injustice of punishing someone for using a plant to find relief from a serious illness—especially someone under the supervision of a licensed physician! Thus, the agency promises not to prosecute legitimate medical marijuana patients, yet it will not give up the power to threaten to do so.
The DEA, indeed anyone, cannot will itself to power while ignoring the truth. The fact is that the letter of the law permits the DEA to punish an individual patient. The DEA has a “policy” of not prosecuting patients, but the agency retains the right to change its mind. Why would the DEA need to threaten an action that it promises never to actually do? The answer is the reason why the Court and the Congress cannot come to terms with the problem of medical marijuana prohibition. The result is common sense, i.e., the People, have seemingly lost control over their own creation.
Kenneth Michael White is an attorney and the author of “The Beginning of Today: The Marihuana Tax Act of 1937” and “Buck” (both by PublishAmerica 2004). Visit www.thebeginningoftoday.com for more information.
The Supreme Court of the United States has interpreted this to mean that the “distribution” and “manufacture” of medical marijuana has been totally prohibited by Congress. Though it is an open question whether substantive due process protects the right of an individual patient to possess cannabis for medical use, even under current Federal law, it is clear—crystal clear—that the Court thinks Congress is in control of the drug policy in the United States of America.
Common sense would indicate that a limited government of enumerated powers could not punish the private, non-commercial medical use of marijuana, since the enumeration of Federal powers via Article I, section 8, of the United States Constitution does not include “health” or “medical care” or “drugs” among them—the ability to “provide for the general welfare” does not, according to common sense, include the ability to punish people for following the advice of their doctor. Neither does it include the wholly intrastate possession of a non-commercial plant as one of Congress’ domains of authority; however, this inconvenience has not prevented a Wickered Court from terrorizing all future Courts from not finding such congressional authority there.
This tyrannical jurisprudence has provided cover for some members of Congress to blame the Court for the prohibition of medical marijuana. For example, representative Susan Davis (D-SD) has put her support of medical marijuana “on the record,” yet her only action is to “hope” for the “chance” that future “scientific” research will persuade the Court to recognize the legitimacy of medical marijuana.
If members of Congress believe drug policy is set by the courts, while the courts maintain that it is set by Congress, then what are the People supposed to do? How can future research yield promising results when the government will not even allow such research to take place? What can be done in an environment where “science” is ignored, as it was in the Food and Drug Administration’s recent claim that “smoked” marijuana has no known medical value (despite a 1999 Federal-led study that concluded exactly otherwise)?
The Court and the Congress—insofar as each has either found authority where none exists, and/or ignored authority that does in fact exist—lack common sense regarding medical marijuana, which not surprisingly has encouraged the DEA to also take an inconsistent stance on the matter. On the one hand, the DEA actively advocates for the continuance of medical marijuana prohibition, i.e., the status quo. On the other hand, the DEA also publicly promises to avoid the “harassment” of legitimate patients who use marijuana for medical purposes and recognizes the right of certain companies—and the Federal bureaucracy itself!—to possess, manufacture, and distribute marijuana or its derivatives. “We only go after the really, really big and really, really bad guys,” says the DEA. “We do not harass sick people.”
Ah, that’s so human—to try to have one’s cake and eat it, too. The DEA, like an unrestrained child, wants what it wants, i.e., its current level of funding and likely future increases of funding. However, at the same time, the DEA also wants to be good, so it cannot help but acknowledge the obvious injustice of punishing someone for using a plant to find relief from a serious illness—especially someone under the supervision of a licensed physician! Thus, the agency promises not to prosecute legitimate medical marijuana patients, yet it will not give up the power to threaten to do so.
The DEA, indeed anyone, cannot will itself to power while ignoring the truth. The fact is that the letter of the law permits the DEA to punish an individual patient. The DEA has a “policy” of not prosecuting patients, but the agency retains the right to change its mind. Why would the DEA need to threaten an action that it promises never to actually do? The answer is the reason why the Court and the Congress cannot come to terms with the problem of medical marijuana prohibition. The result is common sense, i.e., the People, have seemingly lost control over their own creation.
Kenneth Michael White is an attorney and the author of “The Beginning of Today: The Marihuana Tax Act of 1937” and “Buck” (both by PublishAmerica 2004). Visit www.thebeginningoftoday.com for more information.
posted by Kenneth Michael White | 11:39 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home