SCOTUS Rules On Medicinal Pot

I believe that marijuana totally and completely should be legalized, and even if that doesn't become a reality, I believe that at the very least, the drug laws have become oppressive and should be less strict. The majority of people in prison are there for drug related issues, and, of course, the majority of those people are black. However, I have no problem with the federal government having more leverage in regards to legislation for or against marijuana use, which was recently decided by the Supreme Court. CNN reports:

In a 6-3 vote, the justices ruled the Bush administration can block the backyard cultivation of pot for personal use, because such use has broader social and financial implications.

"Congress' power to regulate purely activities that are part of an economic 'class of activities' that have a substantial effect on interstate commerce is firmly established," Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority.

Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, William Rehnquist and Clarence Thomas dissented. The case took an unusually long time to be resolved, with oral arguments held in November.

The decision means that federal anti-drug laws trump state laws that allow the use of medical marijuana, said CNN senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin. Ten states have such laws.

I should point out that the recent ruling doesn't actually overturn the state laws allowing medicinal marijuana use, per se. Rather, it's more like, "don't be surprised if the DEA comes knocking at your door." Essentially, it's at the federal government's discretion whether or not you could be prosecuted for drug use, and in my opinion, that's the way it should be. I will say that I am Hamiltonian in my views concerning the federal government; a strong centralized government is necessary for a strong nation. Hamilton is by far my favorite framer, as I have recently become more turned off by the more libertarian Thomas Jefferson. Right now I am reading an excellent biography of Hamilton written by Ron Chernow. But I digress.

The national government used the same logic and loose Constitutional interpretation (in regards to the Constitution's "commerce clause") in order to trump segregation in most private institutions. Although the federal goverment sometimes passes laws that I don't agree with (possibly the understatement of the year), I still disagree with the principles of federalism.

In regards to California's marijuana laws as they currently stand, for consistancy's sake, I don't think that even medicinal marijuana users should be able to grow their own marijuana. Not only should it be prescribed by the doctor, but it should also be distributed either by a doctor or a qualified individual. Just because you own a chemical lab doesn't mean you should be able to manufacture your own Prozac. If users weren't allowed to grow their own marijuana, I doubt the Justice Department would have had a case against them.