Long-established in this nation is the principle that states can’t make laws that conflict with federal laws. In fact, that’s enshrined in our Constitution.
Article VI of that venerable document states, “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.”
Federal law, then, is the “supreme law of the land.” It trumps any state law.
However, Colorado challenged that notion in 2012 when it passed a referendum allowing recreational marijuana use, which is against federal law. Other states have followed.
Normally, federal authorities would tell states, in no unclear terms, to step in line with the law, as it often did with Southern states over civil rights issues a half century ago.
Yet the U.S. Attorney General’s Office, then under the leadership of Eric Holder, instead issued a memo in 2013 telling federal prosecutors to prioritize eight areas of marijuana law to enforce, which mostly covered distribution of the drug. It left how to handle marijuana use up to states and said those like Colorado needed to establish “strict regulatory schemes” that protected those eight areas of federal interest.
“These schemes must be tough in practice, not just on paper, and include strong, state-based enforcement efforts, backed by adequate funding,” the memo said.
But there were two big problems with that:
1. Congress had still passed a law that was on the books forbidding marijuana possession, and the executive branch does not have authority to ignore laws written by the legislative branch, only determine how to carry them out.
2. The advice to states to strictly enforce their marijuana regulations was a weak attempt at shadowing what everyone knew was the clear intent of the memo: To let states know that the federal government wasn’t going to give them a hard time for allowing marijuana use.
With that background, the news that broke Thursday that current U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions is rescinding the memo is a welcome step in the right direction of enforcing our nation’s laws. It will potentially shut down the growing (yet illegal) marijuana industries in many states.
Beyond the legal issues at stake, the bigger issue is this: Is marijuana harmful? We believe it is. Frequent use makes people unmotivated to work or care for their families. That is so universally recognized that the lazy stoner has become a stock figure in American culture.
And many people start smoking marijuana, which is much more potent under current strains than in times past, before moving onto stronger narcotics. It’s in the public interest of our country to not become the kind of place that encourages vices like drug use.
— Charlie Smith
