Wednesday, January 18, 2006

Gonzales v. Oregon

The Supreme Court yesterday upheld Oregon's decision to allow doctors to prescribe drugs for suicides, a violation of federal drug law.

I was hoping that the decision, Gonzales v. Oregon, had upheld states' rights, but instead it seems that the court only said that the attorney general didn't go after them quite right. In combination with Gonzales v. Raich, which allowed federal regulations to trump California drug law, it looks like the current court shows little opposition to unconstitutional federal drug laws.

For an illustration to paleocons as to the error of such laws, the Ninth Circuit ruled in United States v. Stewart that a man who built his own machine guns couldn't be prosecuted for their possession under commerce clause-based firearms law. In light of the Raich decision, the Supreme Court vacated* Stewart.

Props to Clarence Thomas for arguing for federalism in both Oregon and Raich. In his Oregon dissent, he quotes 545 U.S. at 27, n38, that states have "traditional police powers to define the criminal law and to protect the health, safety, and welfare of their citizens."

*ordered a new decision

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home