Who Hijacked Our Country

Thursday, February 12, 2015

Are Federal Marijuana Laws Unconstitutional?

U.S. District Court Judge Kimberly J. Mueller is considering this argument.  Within thirty days she'll decide whether to hear a case based on this reasoning. The case she's considering involves nine men who have been charged with growing marijuana on private and public land in northern California.  Judge Mueller asked the attorneys who are prosecuting this case:

“If I were persuaded by the defense's argument, if I bought their argument, what would you lose here?”

Good question.

The pot growers' defense lawyers are arguing that classifying marijuana as a Schedule One drug — meaning it's one of the most dangerous drugs in the world and it has no medical value whatsoever — is unconstitutional, since twenty-three states have legalized marijuana for medical purposes.

Defense attorney Zenia Gilg said that therefore:  “It's impossible to say that there is no accepted medical use.”

The prosecuting attorney countered that too few doctors believe marijuana has any medical value.  WTF???  Then who, pray tell, is writing all these thousands of medical prescriptions for marijuana???

I hope Judge Mueller takes this case.  These questions need to be asked.

Labels: , ,


Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm not seeing this with this case, as I read the article I think If I was hiking in a federal park I could wander into their weed patch and they could open fire on me.

These guys sound like they're just trying to save their asses, and not the type of case I want to see in challenging to pot laws.


February 12, 2015 at 9:30 PM  
Blogger Jerry Critter said...

It makes no sense classifying pot at the same level as heroin. Even something as highly addictive as morphine is a schedule II drug, presumably because of its medical use.

February 12, 2015 at 9:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


True everything we got to replace Heroin is more addictive and less effective.


February 13, 2015 at 10:51 AM  
Blogger Tom Harper said...

Erik: It's too bad these guys are the "vehicle" for challenging pot laws. They sound like a bunch of thugs that just happen to be pot growers instead of meth dealers or extortionists. But I still think it's a valid case. A long time ago the state of Illinois used this same legal reasoning to reduce pot penalties -- that having the same jail sentences for pot and heroin was a violation of the Equal Protection clause of the Constitution.

Jerry: You're right, it makes no sense at all.

February 13, 2015 at 12:14 PM  
Blogger MRMacrum said...

I have no problem with this case being used to question the constitutionality of Federal Pot law. Someone had to bring it up. It might as well be this one. Bad law is bad law and should be targeted at every opportunity.

February 13, 2015 at 4:22 PM  
Blogger Tom Harper said...

MRM: "Bad law is bad law and should be targeted at every opportunity."

Agreed. This issue needs to be examined and brought into the spotlight, regardless of how savory or unsavory the defendants are.

February 14, 2015 at 11:34 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home