Dear Congressman,
I am wondering under what article or amendment of the U.S. Constitution is Congress legislating federal law against pot? (I choose pot because it is in the news.)
The U.S. Constitution is pretty clear that provisions in the Constitution can not be construed or warped to serve another purpose. If you do not market/transfer across state lines and it is solely in a state with no commerce implications to other states, then how can Congress legally legislate against it?
If Congress truly had a constitutional right, then they would have not needed an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to ban alcohol. If there is no explicit way to legally legislate the law, then the state and people reserve the right.
If this is the case, then federal drug laws pertaining to personal growth of pot are unconstitutional even though it is deemed as manufacturing.
I am correct in this. It doesn't take a lawyer to understand the Constitution; it is simplistic by design so there is limited federal government. Help me with the justification of unconstitutional laws, especially this case.
It is your duty and legal obligation to uphold the U.S. Constitution as sworn by oath.
Why are people not reading the U.S. Constitution?
Please follow the U.S. Constitution, and let the state determine these matters.
Please send me your comments, you can be as nice or as abrasive as you want; however, I just need the truth and facts.
There are other severe constitutional matters going on in Congress today; my thoughts on all of them are based on constitutionalism and not affiliations of political parties.
Thanks.
Joseph Fisher writes from The Plains.
4 Opinion
