Should the DEA enforce federal anti-drug laws in states, like California, where voters have legalized medical marijuana?
DEA has to enforce federal anti-drug laws, no matter what laws any state passes. Most people debate this statement on the merits of medical marijuana. However, these arguments miss a much larger and more important question. Is anti-drug laws a federal issue? Our founding fathers realized the danger of an over-reaching federal government. They realized that any governmental power should be kept as close to the people as possible. For that reason, our constitution states, “any power not expressly given to the federal government is reserved for the states.” Our founding fathers envisioned a federal government whose sole purpose was to handle matters that could not be done at the state level and were necessary for preserving the union. These functions, as the founding fathers saw it, included national defense (i.e. one state could not raise an army large enough to fight another country) and traties (i.e. foreign countries would deal with the federal government instead of individual states)
Related Questions
- Should the DEA enforce federal anti-drug laws in states, like California, where voters have legalized medical marijuana?
- Will the ruling by the California court that medical marijuana does not violate federal laws help other states?
- What do federal bank and thrift examiners do to enforce fair lending laws?
