Letters to the Editor
domini
Published Letters: 1162 Editor's Choice: 79
-
There's never been a right to smoke pot
[Read the article: My husband went to jail for pot -- and now he's smoking again!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It was common in the 1900-20s era, and not prohibited until 1933 nationally (although it was restricted in New Orleans much earlier, but the law was not enforced.)
Civil liberties are linked to the Bill of Rights. Voting, speech, etc. Comparing smoking pot to freedom of speech and the right to vote is a little much. We have a president who violates multiple Amendments in the Bill of Rights, and we're supposed to get hyper over pot?
This is a no brainer. Defending free speech, the right to vote, the right to privacy, and the integrity of the courts (see the war on the Judiciary), and the prohibitation against illegal search and seizure is just more important to me than worrying about pot. One should have priorities, and frankly, legalizing pot is pretty low on the totem poll for me, way behind survival issues that affect whether people will have jobs, eat, sleep, or get shot. Legalizing pot versus Darfur? Guess which one I'm interested in. Talk about teeny, tiny, whiny Third World problems.
Pick your battles. If pot is your battle, that's fine. Just because I don't think it's as important a battle to wage does not make me a sheep, nor do I deserve the sneers that I've knuckled under to jackboots. I know what is important, and fighting for the right to toke up just really is NOT as important.
The US has much worse problems right now that the weed issue.
-
A few problematic arguments from the extremists
[Read the article: My husband went to jail for pot -- and now he's smoking again!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The 15th Amendment specifically protects the right to vote.
"Section. 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Section. 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment15/
This amendment is a part of the bill of rights, by the way.
The right to privacy does not protect pot smoking, and that has been affirmed several times by the Supreme Court, most recently in 2005.
"The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled doctors can be blocked from prescribing marijuana for patients suffering from pain caused by cancer or other serious illnesses.
In a 6-3 vote, the justices ruled the Bush administration can block the backyard cultivation of pot for personal use, because such use has broader social and financial implications...The current case considered by the justices dealt with the broader issue of whether marijuana users could be subject to prosecution."
http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/06/scotus.medical.marijuana/
here is the case itself
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=03-1454
-
Weed is not a right
[Read the article: My husband went to jail for pot -- and now he's smoking again!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Clarification: the 15th Amendment is a part of the Bill of Rights because the amendment amends the Bill, and the Bill Amends the Constitution. The COnstitution itself lists very little rights. That's why the Federalists were forced to add a Bill of Rights.
The recent legal arguments for use of medical marijuana before the Court have been attempted through the doctrine of necessity, because the court recognizes no right based in the 9th to marijuana or any other mood altering substance. Both the 2001 and 2005 cases were based in the necessity defense and, in the 2005 case, also the Commerce Clause. Arguing the 9th doesn't work, because opium, morphine, and a number of other drugs used are not seen as a right, and there's no real evidence that a majority today would see it as a right (the "living document" position).
Necessity and the 2001 case
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/health/jan-june01/medmarijuana_5-14.html
The doctrine of natural rights does not cover smoking of any type through the 9th Amendment, because at the time of the Constitution and after, smoking anything, including tobacco, has been seen as a personal habit, not a fundamental civil right.
The 9th Amendment protects fundamental rights, and smoking marijuana is not seen as a fundamental right. For the lay person:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment09/
explains that. It does protect privacy because privacy is an associational right through the 1st, 3rd, 4th, and 5th Amendments, as well English common law and historical understanding of such a right.
Some people think marijuana is a fundamental right. The case law does not agree, nor do a majority of the people in the US. It is seen as a luxury. To conflate it with a fundamental right is to insult those of us who lived in segregated neighborhoods, fought to integrate schools, vote, have access to jobs, etc. To equate voting with a luxury like smoking marijuana is minimize the deaths of those who fought for serious rights in the 50s, 60s, and beyond. Smoking marijuana is a luxury and/or priviledge, as is drinking, driving a car, and other things. Having an Ipod is not a right, either, and it is on the same level. Gay marriage is much more serious to me than marijuana, and I could support an argument that gay marriage is a right through the 1st Amendment right of association and the 14th Amendment. To put these issues on the same level is simply wrong.