Missouri makes all sorts of attempts to protect its citizens from federal overreach. It isn’t usually met with such fuss.
Cannabis. Kung Flu. It’s as if the 2nd Amendment is being specifically targeted for some reason. 
3 Likes
It did.
Who does SAPA apply to?
Seems to me our federal government has absolutely no constitutionally authorized power to interfere with the lives of citizens within a state who may be engaged in the manufacture, sale or transportation of marijuana within their State’s borders.
How do I know this to be true? Because our federal Constitution says so under the Tenth Amendment.
As my example let us consider that prior to the adoption of the 18th Amendment, our federal government had no authority to enter a state and prosecute the people or interfere with their lives therein for the manufacture, sale and transportation of intoxicating liquors within their state borders. Their hands were tied by our Constitution.
But after the adoption of the 18th Amendment Eliot Ness became the first federal agent, and acting under our Constitution, was authorized to enter a state and arrest those engaged in the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors.
Amendment XVIII
Section 1
After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.
Section 2
The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Section 3
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by Congress.
With the adoption of the 18th Amendment our federal government and the several states had concurrent power to enforce prohibition and prosecute those engaged in the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors.
But this power granted to our federal government was later withdrawn by the 21st Amendment in the following words:
Amendment XXI
Section 1
The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
Section 2
The transportation or importation into any State, territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.
Section 3
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by convention in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission thereof to the States by the Congress.
And thus, our federal governments’ power over intoxicating liquors within a state’s borders evaporated with the repeal of the 18th Amendment and adoption of the 21st Amendment!
So, Safiel, where is the wording in our federal constitution by which the feds are authorized to enter a state and engage in “Federal law enforcement efforts” with regard to regulating marijuana, intoxicating liquors, fire arms, etc? Seems to me the protection of the Tenth Amendment forbids such actions.
JWK
“If the Constitution was ratified under the belief, sedulously propagated on all sides that such protection was afforded, [the Tenth Amendment] would it not now be a fraud upon the whole people to give a different construction to its powers?”___ Justice Story
Unconstitutional laws are “anathema and void”. A nullity as if they never existed in the first place. One cannot nullify what does not exist.
What federal statute did this law infringe upon?
Was it struck down because it may at some point infringe on some as yet unwritten federal statute?
Was the law not “in furtherance” of the constitution?
3 Likes
I think Safiel is not on board with Federalism, our Constitution’s plan.
JWK
Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. And that is why the Democrat Party Leadership and globalists detest federalism . . . it is an obstacle to controlling and subjugating the people completely.
Strictly speaking, that is absolutely correct.
And racist.
Then why can I but marijuana legally in Michigan?
Because Michigan hasn’t nullified the federal law.
They are also a violation of the 2nd Amendment.
There should be no such thing among citizens.
Only some things.
Of course they have an un enforced law is effectively null.
