3 ms·

cannabis shops are illegal everywhere in the united states, though. federal law supersedes state law

Simulacra 3y ago
Try explaining that to the literally hundreds of marijuana shops, even in Maryland, and the District of Columbia openly selling..
- deadfoxygrandpa 3y ago
  theyre running the risk of getting into serious legal trouble with the feds. which mastercard apparently doesnt want to do
- mikece 3y ago
  Show me in the Constitution where FedGov has the authority to dictate drug law or policy that doesn’t cross State Lines. (Spoiler: it’s not there.)
  - lxgr 3y ago
    Not a lawyer, but I’d strongly suspect that funds flows crossing state lines and using Federal Reserve wire transfers for settlement would make Fed jurisdiction quite possible.
    - mikece 3y ago
      Might surprise you to learn there is precedent to refute that. Flow of money isn’t material to the law: flow of good and staying within State boundaries is the point.
      - semiquaver 3y ago
        What precedent? Wickard v. Filburn (1942) pretty much blew away any limitation on the federal government’s use of the commerce clause. In that case even a farmer’s subsistence crop of wheat for personal use was found to be in violation of a federal wheat quota because such activity in aggregate could hypothetically affect national prices. If that can be regulated as interstate commerce surely all cannabis production and consumption can as well.
  - tbyehl 3y ago
    Article III.
  - mrguyorama 3y ago
    What part of the supremacy clause is unclear?
gnopgnip 3y ago
This federal law makes an exception where it is legal at the state level though, via the Rohrabacher–Farr amendment
- deadfoxygrandpa 3y ago
  specifically for medical marijuana. not recreational.
- semiquaver 3y ago
  That amendment only covers medical usage, not recreational. And it only applies to the justice department’s enforcement of the laws, doesn’t actually change the law. Federal banking regulators are unaffected, for example.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

Try explaining that to the literally hundreds of marijuana shops, even in Maryland, and the District of Columbia openly selling..

deadfoxygrandpa 3y ago
theyre running the risk of getting into serious legal trouble with the feds. which mastercard apparently doesnt want to do
mikece 3y ago
Show me in the Constitution where FedGov has the authority to dictate drug law or policy that doesn’t cross State Lines. (Spoiler: it’s not there.)
- lxgr 3y ago
  Not a lawyer, but I’d strongly suspect that funds flows crossing state lines and using Federal Reserve wire transfers for settlement would make Fed jurisdiction quite possible.
  - mikece 3y ago
    Might surprise you to learn there is precedent to refute that. Flow of money isn’t material to the law: flow of good and staying within State boundaries is the point.
    - semiquaver 3y ago
      What precedent? Wickard v. Filburn (1942) pretty much blew away any limitation on the federal government’s use of the commerce clause. In that case even a farmer’s subsistence crop of wheat for personal use was found to be in violation of a federal wheat quota because such activity in aggregate could hypothetically affect national prices. If that can be regulated as interstate commerce surely all cannabis production and consumption can as well.
- tbyehl 3y ago
  Article III.
- mrguyorama 3y ago
  What part of the supremacy clause is unclear?

gnopgnip 3y ago

This federal law makes an exception where it is legal at the state level though, via the Rohrabacher–Farr amendment

deadfoxygrandpa 3y ago
specifically for medical marijuana. not recreational.
semiquaver 3y ago
That amendment only covers medical usage, not recreational. And it only applies to the justice department’s enforcement of the laws, doesn’t actually change the law. Federal banking regulators are unaffected, for example.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]