3 ms·
> This is exactly the same as how prohibition required an ammendment [sic] to ban alcohol. Can't wait for SCOTUS to apply the same logic to drug prohibition, w
by jyrkesh 4y ago
> This is exactly the same as how prohibition required an ammendment [sic] to ban alcohol.
Can't wait for SCOTUS to apply the same logic to drug prohibition, which is also not at all an enumerated federal power (assuming the same logic that alcohol regulation isn't one either).
- hellojesus 4y agoAgreed! I just finished writing a comment to someone else specifically stating that Schedule 1 drugs should be handed the same result as R v. W just got!
- feet 4y agoGreat point! The CSA and DEA are unconstitutional, when will the supreme court declare it as such? Oh they won't, because they're activist judges with an agenda not some impartial arbiter of the constitution
- hellojesus 4y agoTotally agree! Though the one point I will make is that the federal government is enumerated the power to regulate interstate commerce, so while they can't ban the substances, they could make it illegal to transport them over state lines. Such is the reason you still can't take mj from one legal state to the next.
- feet 4y agoYou're right they do, but the whole thing has been a giant way to shit on the fourth amendment and attack people that those in power don't like. We should still be able to have bodily autonomy and consume whatever substance we want. Just like women should have bodily autonomy and not be forced to carry pregnancies against their will