Pubdate: Wed, 23 May 2001
Source: Tribune Review (PA)
Copyright: 2001 Tribune-Review Publishing Co.
Section: Opinion & Commentary
Author: Scott Mueller


You are correct in saying that the Controlled Substances Act "makes 
absolutely no provision for medicinal marijuana use" and you are also 
correct in saying "the judicial branch isn't supposed to make law" ("Timely 
civics lesson," May 16).

However, the judicial branch is supposed to void bad laws when they appear. 
Now, I don't claim to be an "expert" on the Constitution, but I have 
studied it extensively, and I can find no place where the Constitution 
gives the Congress the authority to dictate what medicine the American 
people can and cannot use.

Do a quick review of the enumerated powers in Article 1, Section 8 (the 
part that lists the powers of Congress) and you'll find that nowhere is the 
power to regulate medicine given to the federal government.

Since the powers listed in the Constitution are the only powers we the 
people gave to the Congress, and regulating medicine is not one of them, 
then you have to conclude that the regulation of medicine is a power 
"reserved to the states respectively, or to the people" (10th Amendment). 
This is the only logical conclusion that can be made.

The Controlled Substances Act is an unconstitutional act, and it is the 
Supreme Court's duty to point that fact out to Congress. If teachers 
everywhere are to teach this case to their students, I hope they start with 
a lesson on the limited powers granted to Congress, and who granted them.

Scott Mueller, Lawrence, Kan.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Terry Liittschwager