InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 40
Posts 1392
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 03/24/2013

Re: hedge_fun post# 73532

Tuesday, 07/30/2013 11:53:49 AM

Tuesday, July 30, 2013 11:53:49 AM

Post# of 146837
This will help those that want to understand the law, really understand it. Notice the case law showing CA law being UNSUCCESSFULLY challenged federally.

"The incongruity between federal and state law has given rise to understandable confusion, but no legal conflict exists merely because state law and federal law treat marijuana differently. Indeed, California’s medical marijuana laws have been challenged unsuccessfully in court on the ground that they are preempted by the CSA. (County of San Diego v. San Diego NORML (July 31, 2008) --- Cal.Rptr.3d ---, 2008 WL 2930117.) Congress has provided that states are free to regulate in the area of controlled substances, including marijuana, provided that state law does not positively conflict with the CSA. (21 U.S.C. § 903.) Neither Proposition 215, nor the MMP, conflict with the CSA because, in adopting these laws, California did not “legalize” medical marijuana, but instead exercised the state’s reserved powers to not punish certain marijuana offenses under state law when a physician has recommended its use to treat a serious medical condition. (See City of Garden Grove v. Superior Court (Kha) (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 355, 371-373, 381-382.)"

I wish I could debate further, but this is my last post here today.