Medical-Marijuana Op-ed Published

by Liberty and Power

My op-ed on the medical-marijuana case before the Supreme Court was published the other day by the Baltimore Chronicle & Sentinel.

comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:

Sheldon Richman - 12/12/2004

Close paren. :)

Sheldon Richman - 12/12/2004

Jonathan, I would argue that the Commerce Clause has to be exercised in a way that is consistent with the General Welfare Clause, which leaves little in the way of legitimate regulation, if anything. The Commerce Clause in practice should do little more than prevent the states from impeding interstate commerce. (At this point I will re-plug my article The Unconstitutionality of Protectionism, which has some bearing on the matter.

Sheldon Richman - 12/12/2004

ALL substances. "Addictiveness" is in persons (i.e., their values) not things. I would recommend Jeffrey Schaler's excellent book "Addiction Is a Choice" and Jacob Sullum's "Saying Yes: In Defense of Drug Use." The classic in this area is Thomas Szasz's "Ceremonial Chemistry." All highly recommended.

Jonathan Dresner - 12/12/2004

Given the structure of his argument, I'd say it's probably the former, though of course Mr. Richman is entirely capable of speaking for himself.

I thought the argument was good, except for one thing: for the drugs to be entirely out of Commerce Clause range they would have to be produced within each state. That's more of an agro-technology issue than a legal issue, though.

Chris Rasmussen - 12/12/2004

Great op-ed. I am enjoyed reading your arguement advocating that the Congress should cease using the "commerce clause" as a blank check for regulation. However, in your last paragraph you seem to be saying that the choice of whether to use marijuana should be left to the individual and not to the doctors. My question is, does this imply that all drugs and addictive substances should be left to individuals to decide, or just marijuana?