Anthony Gregory posted on Campaign for Liberty’s blog today some questions that he still has about the new medical marijuana policies coming from the Dept. of Justice. He asks, how does the Federal Government decide when a State law has been broken, in order to prosecute from their federal jurisdiction.
It is indeed a very positive step that Obama has taken in ordering a halt to federal medical marijuana crackdowns where state law is not being violated. As Glenn Greenwald notes, it is a victory for humane treatment of patients, individual liberty and states rights. But there are limits to this improvement. For one, the determination of what constitutes a violation of state law is still under the discretion of the federal government. This is not the proper role of Washington DC. In March, the federal government raided a San Francsico clinic under the pretense of enforcing state sales tax law. But how can the feds know when the state law has been violated, and why should it be up to the feds to prosecute people, presumably under federal authority, because they happened to allegedly violate state law? Will the state law violations be adjudicated properly? Will it have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that state law was violated before federal prosecution or conviction commences?
You can read his post here.
I’ve been involved in taxes for longer then I care to acknowledge, both on the personal side (all my working life story!!) and from a legal viewpoint since satisfying the bar and following up on tax law. I’ve furnished a lot of advice and corrected a lot of wrongs, and I must say that what you’ve posted makes complete sense. Please persist in the good work – the more individuals know the better they’ll be armed to comprehend with the tax man, and that’s what it’s all about.