4 ms·
The treaty isn't about prosecuting crimes its about adhering to international drug policy so drugs don't incubate in certain countries and end up in others. In
by chatterhead 4y ago
The treaty isn't about prosecuting crimes its about adhering to international drug policy so drugs don't incubate in certain countries and end up in others. In this way, the UN does have regulatory input. It's all "voluntary"; we can always withdraw from the treaty or ignore it.
Yes, you are incorrectly generalizing Article 6. It's literally saying Treaties trump state laws and is directing judges to adhere to Federal laws and Treaties over the state laws and Constitutions which conflict with that.
- 9wzYQbTYsAIc 4y agoI was directly quoting the 2nd paragraph of article 6: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” no, i was misunderstanding the word “notwithstanding” in the clause to be an escape valve for the states, rather than as overruling the states. again, i’m not a lawyer. my point is that on an international level, and on a national level, the legal reforms of cannabis do appear to be well underway and nearly in full swing. and regardless, as i noted elsewhere, according to Congress, themselves: “Both Congress and the Administration have the ability to alter marijuana’s status as a Schedule I substance.” https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN11204 https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN11204 and if UNODC is progressing as they are, it may only be a short matter of time before the weight shifts in favor of moving cannabis from Schedule I the US was at that point about a decade ago, but look now