Obama seemed unable to fully answer a constituents question yesterday. As a patriotic American, I want to offer our fumbling President a helping hand, so as to prevent any future embarrassment on his part.
Yesterday in Minnesota, President Obama was asked “If you can’t legalize marijuana, why can’t you just legalize medical marijuana?” Here’s his response at the local townhall, courtesy of RawStory.com:
“A lot of states are making decisions about medical marijuana,” Obama explained. “As a controlled substance, the issue is then that is it being prescribed by a doctor as opposed to… you know, well, I’ll leave it at that.”
Good job, President Obama. Marijuana is currently a “controlled substance”, as it has been since 1970…which means the answer to the question, “Why can’t you just legalize medical marijuana?” starts here: Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 U.S. 243 (2006).
Gonzales v. Oregon is the case that the pending lawsuit against the state of Iowa is based on. President Obama, if you haven’t heard of this case, and how it relates to medical marijuana…well, you soon will.
From Gonzalez v Oregon:
In 2001, the Attorney General issued an Interpretive Rule to address the implementation and enforcement of the CSA with respect to ODWDA [Oregon Death With Dignity Act], declaring that using controlled substances to assist suicide is not a legitimate medical practice and that dispensing or prescribing them for this purpose is unlawful under the CSA.
The United States Supreme Court ruled on behalf of the state of Oregon and upheld Oregon’s statute allowing physician-assisted suicide:
(d) The Attorney General’s opinion is unpersuasive under Skidmore. The CSA and this Court’s case law amply support the conclusion that Congress regulates medical practice insofar as it bars doctors from using their prescription-writing powers as a means to engage in illicit drug dealing and trafficking as conventionally understood. Beyond this, the Act manifests no intent to regulate the practice of medicine generally, which is understandable given federalism’s structure and limitations. The CSA’s structure and operation presume and rely upon a functioning medical profession regulated under the States’ police powers.
In other words, the States get to decide what is and isn’t medicine, Mr. Obama. Marijuana is already medicine legally in 16 states (plus D.C.). You can dodge questions all you want, but legally, the federal government cannot determine whether or not state medical laws are legitimate or not. Surely you know this. After all, the state of Arizona has just cited Gonzalez v. Oregon in Arizona’s medical marijuana lawsuit against the federal government:
The court concluded that Oregon met the constitutional requirements for standing by showing a sufficient injury to its sovereign and legitimate interest in the continued enforceability of its own statutes. Id. at 1087. In reaching this conclusion, the court did not require evidence or allegations of the federal government actually attempting to enforce its laws against the state. The mere conflict between state and federal law, and thus, the state’s consequent inability to enforce its own laws, was sufficient to demonstrate an injury for standing purposes.
If Arizona can figure it out, Obama, then you should be able to as well. Next time you’re faced with this question by a constituent, kindly refer them to Gonzalez v Oregon. After all, you were a constitutional “professor” at the University of Chicago Law School…right?
WeedPress: The Paper Trail 
Leave a comment