First of all, acknowledging that the 9th Circuit is the nation's most liberal court of appeals.
What I'm thinking is this: we have here a conflict between federal law and state law, a situation such as existed a number of times in the nation's history (think slavery, voting rights, etc.). Now, states rights' advocates (the position of traditional conservatives and Republicans) do not believe federal law should supersede the rights of the states. We liberals have always disagreed vehemently with that.
Now, you say, the Obama administration could choose to ignore enforcement of the federal law. Whoa Nellie: think about the dangers of such a precedent. Say a future Republican president decided to honor the rights of a conservative state that has decided on its own to make abortion illegal, ignoring the federal law of the land, and turn his (or her) head the other way in executing federal standards. He'd let a state, say, incarcerate women who have gotten abortions. We wouldn't like that much.
We have to understand the broader principles at work here. It's up to Congress to change the drug laws. In the meantime, the Justice Department and DEA have indeed substantially relaxed enforcement, and have said they won't challenge the new CO and WA laws. The dispensaries they've been going after in California are actually ones that are not in conformity even with California's laws. To wit, from the NYT:
The United States attorneys said the dispensaries were violating not only federal law but also state law, which requires operators to be primary caregivers to their customers and distribute marijuana only for medical purposes.
“We’re not concerned in prosecuting patients or people who are legitimate caregivers for ill people, who are in good faith complying with state law,” said Benjamin B. Wagner, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of California. “But we are concerned about large commercial operations that are generating huge amounts of money by selling marijuana in this essentially unregulated free-for-all that exists in California.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/us/hundreds-of-california-medical-marijuana-shops-close.htmlIf California wants to legalize marijuana in general, it would probably be in a different position. But the "medical" marijuana laws they have should be enforced as written; if big private pot dispensaries are pulling in fortunes "treating" people claiming headaches, it's not right, and the government has the right to prosecute. I think the court is doing the right thing in supporting the precedence of federal laws and agencies here.
= new reply since forum marked as read
