I just had someone ask me an interesting question about Prop 19.

[Xithras]

The federal government is suing Arizona right now for its anti-illegal immigrant laws based on the legal theory that federalization of an issue completely preempts a states right to regulate that issue themselves.

If the federal government succeeds in its argument against Arizona, won't that completely destroy the legal ability of Californians to regulate or legalize marijuana, which is itself a federally prohibited product? When Prop 19 was first proposed, federal enforcement was brought up, but has been largely ignored because the DEA doesn't have the time to chase down every Californian with a pot plant in his backyard. It was acknowledged that some risk of federal prosecution might exist, but that it would be infinitesimally small.

The federal governments position in the Arizona suit claims that the federal laws don't simply override state laws, but that the federal government has the right to completely strike down state laws that conflict with federal law. In the past, this has ONLY been done with state laws that conflict with the Constitution, so extending that right to congressional laws is sort of a new thing.

Which beggars a simple question. If the federal government wins against Arizona, and Prop 19 passes this fall, what stops the federal government from just striking the new state law because it conflicts with federal laws?

[Adsos Letter]

1. Hmmmm...

I don't fully understand the relationship of Prop 19 to our state's medical marijuana allowance (I realize it's not the issue you addressed) but Oakland seems to be moving ahead with a no-holds-barred, in-the-fed's-face approach to medical marijuana production:

"The plan would allow licensing for four warehouse-sized growers and a yet to be determined number of medium-sized growers to provide the 3 tons of marijuana sold at the dispensaries in Oakland every year." http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/east_bay&id=7554863

One of these proposed warehouse sized sites is estimated at 100,000 sq. ft. Perhaps Oakland is betting that the government simply will not enforce?

here I am, in the middle of reading about the whole nullification, Popular Sovereignty, state's rights issues of the mid nineteenth-century, and I can't suggest an answer to your question...must.get.coffee.