51–60 of 247 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Federal laws do trump state laws in most cases, it is settled. This case is due to the fed's noninterference policy, which they chose for themselves, it's not being forced on them because of some Civil War-era debate.
The Feds should never fear interfering with state laws when federal law is in direct opposition. It's the basis of the entire system.
No, it isn't. The Constitution is the basis of the entire system, and it defines the powers of the Federal government. The 10th amendment says:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is it inaccurate? Cannabis is legal in much of the country (at the state level) and the businesses are blocked from much of the banking system because it's federally illegal. Edit: OP, if you're going to completely change the last sentence of your post after people respond, which then changes your point, at least highlight that you've made a significant change.
It’s illegal everywhere due to federal law… states altering their laws doesn’t change that. The federal government just doesn’t enforce it in most cases. The DEA can start enforcing tomorrow if they wanted
I’m sure it would go down really really well if the DEA started arresting people for simple possession in states where it’s perfectly legal.
UN has moved to stop resticting it's use for medicinal purposes, but it is still banned for private consumption. As a signatory to the UN drugs convention, US has voted againsy decriminalisation. This is a clumsy summary, ANAL https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/12/1079132
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They'll never accept crypto. They generally take cash, debit card, and a prepaid debit card (something prepaid like that) and use modern PoS. Bank access is coming soon too.
>... debit card... Technically, at least in CA/OR, they're often just processed as an ATM withdrawal that occurs at point of sale.
What's the reason for CA/OR? Local banking shouldn't be an issue?
Prediction: Dems will make a move on federal legalization in the months before the 2024 presidential election, or at least make federal legalization a major election issue. A lot of right wing / libertarian adjacent people were hoping Trump would come out in favor of it as a 2020 election issue, to outflank Biden on at least one issue. It didn't happen, but I bet it would have made the election a bit closer -- it wou…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The comment you’re responding to is referring to the supremacy clause.
That is quite properly nuanced, and "in most cases" means "those cases where the Federal law is constitutional." SCOTUS rules on that issue all the time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Feds should never fear interfering with state laws when federal law is in direct opposition. It's the basis of the entire system.
> It's the basis of the entire system No, it isn't. The Constitution is the basis of the entire system, and it defines the powers of the Federal government. The 10th amendment says: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They'll never accept crypto. They generally take cash, debit card, and a prepaid debit card (something prepaid like that) and use modern PoS. Bank access is coming soon too.
Some local stores actually tried crypto back when Bitcoin was exploding. It was so inconvenient and volatile that it only lasted months.
Variability in currency would destroy these companies quickly.
Didn't we fight the bloodiest war in the history of this country based on which laws (State or Federal) had primacy? And it's still not settled due to Obama's weed policies.
No, the US fought a war over slavery. The "states' rights" framing of the US Civil War skips over which specific right the southerns states were willing to die for. It wasn't abstract, though it was papered over as such. The history of later southern political leaders (e.g. Richard Russell) confirms that the fundamental issue was the enslavement (ideal, for them) or segregation and oppression of blacks in the US. Whi…