There's a hugely important case being heard this week at the Supreme Court of the United States. Unfortunately the actual subject of the case evinces so many preconceived notions that few in the media are reporting on the true importance of said case. It's called Raich v. Ashcroft, and it's about medical marijuana. At first it seems that's all about, Two women in California got busted for smoking pot, even though they had a doctor's clearance and were fully in compliance with California law. The real issue here has little to do with marijuana, and a whole lot to do with states' rights. If the citizens of a state vote to do something, and the Federal government decides that that something is illegal, does the Federal government have the Constitutional right to push their view on the state government? Obviously there are some issues in the Constitution that are granted specifically to the Federal government, the right to make or break treaties among them. There's nothing in there, as far as I can tell, about organic materials, especially if they are not transported across state lines. In my not so humble opinion, the Federal government oversteps its bounds too much already, and I hope the SCOTUS puts a stop to it.

Turns out the lawyer arguing for my side (libertarian, legalizing drugs side) is Randy Barnett, a writer on one of my favorite blogs, The Volokh Conspiracy. Check it out, and read lots of other interesting items.