Medical Marijuana: A Tough Choice

Now, unless you've been tokin' up something fierce lately, you've heard the news: The Supreme Court has decided that medical marijuana can be a no-no under federal law, regardless of what the States have to say about it.

As a loyal Republican, I can only say: Bravo. But at the same time, I ask folks to consider whether the States are being given their due.

States are often seen as "laboratories" for particular approaches toward the law. I think that the federal interest in preventing drug abuse was a major factor in allow federal supremacy over such laws. But does this take into account the rights of each State to determine for itself whether medical uses of marijuana are legitimate?

I question whether, in the so-called "war against terror", we are risking overstepping the bounds of federal jurisdiction. The Court doesn't think so. But shouldn't Congress also have a say?If Congress decides to enact a law permitting States to determine this issue, shouldn't it be permitted to do so? Indeed, I think it has the right, and perhaps the obligation, to consider doing so.

A federal state, after all, does not mean a unitary one.