Cannabis Science Inc (fka CBIS)

[DouglasJH]

Speaking of game changers.

A recent Supreme Court decision (Bond vs. United States, No. 09–1227. Argued February 22, 2011—Decided June 16, 2011) now allows individuals to contest federal government's unconstitutional reach to rights preserved to States and individuals, including 10th Amendment rights. This means that Congress's action in falsely declaring Schedule I status can be raised in Court.

If the constitutional structure of our Government that protects individual liberty is compromised, individuals who suffer otherwise justiciable injury may object.

Just as it is appropriate for an individual, in a proper case, to invoke separation-of-powers or checks-and balances constraints, so too may a litigant, in a proper case, challenge a law as enacted in contravention of constitutional principles of federalism. That claim need not depend on the vicarious assertion of a State’s constitutional interests, even if a State’s constitutional interests are also implicated.
.......................................
The principles of limited national powers and state sovereignty are intertwined. While neither originates in the Tenth Amendment, both are expressed by it. Impermissible interference with state sovereignty is not within the enumerated powers of the National Government, see New York, 505 U. S., at 155–159, and action that exceeds the National Government’s enumerated powers undermines the sovereign interests of States. See United States v. Lopez, 514 U. S. 549, 564 (1995). The unconstitutional action can cause concomitant injury to persons in individual cases.