Oklahoma and Nebraska ask Supreme Court to return legal weed to the black market

Colorado should counter-sue Nebraska and Oklahoma for having oppressive and antiquated abortion laws which drive women into their state.


Idaho is so insular that I doubt they even care what the Fed has to say, generally speaking. i have relatives over there who outright say they’re citizens of their town first, Idaho second, and the US third. Like a scary little brother of Texas.


Will somebody think of the poor guys working over time to supply and deliver all those Doritos and Twinkies? It’s putting a huge burden on the snack food supply system.


The early Federal laws that banned marijuana were tax laws (to sell or buy marijuana, you needed a tax stamp which was overpriced and not actually available), and most of the later ones were justified as regulations on “interstate commerce”, which under FDR’s New Deal had been stretched enough to let the Feds regulate just about anything (the canonical case being about regulating a farmer growing grain on his own land to feed to his own pigs, which is actually somewhat applicable to marijuana issues.)

So even if growing marijuana in Colorado for local consumption weren’t something Federal law had jurisdiction over, taking it across the border to Nebraska is. (That doesn’t give the Feds the right to ban it in Colorado or Nebraska, IMHO, but it does forbid Nebraska to give preferential treatment to their local marijuana-growing cartels :slight_smile:

The Commerce Clause would apply here, correctly for once. But the proper solution would be seizure of weed coming across the Colorado borders, maybe kick OK and NE some federal funds to help with enforcement. Re-banning it in CO would be an egregious violation of the principle of Least Restrictive Means.


I grew up in Colorado 30 miles from the Wyoming border, not too far from the Nebraska border. My mom bought groceries in Cheyenne once a month because they didn’t have a sales tax, a state gasoline tax, or a state tobacco tax. She trekked home with a trunk full of groceries, a full tank of gas and a couple cartons of smokes. That was illegal with varying degrees, but nobody ever worried about her getting pulled over with her car full of contraband.

Once a year, we headed up to buy illegal fireworks in either Cheyenne or Scottsbluff depending on whether we wanted to stop at Cabela’s.

Granted, marijuana is comparatively super illegal, but it’s not up to the citizens of Colorado to change any more than it was up to Wyoming or Nebraska to up their taxes or ban fireworks in order to accommodate us across the border. It’s already illegal for out-of-state buyers to get significant amounts of weed that they can take back home, and the state troopers aren’t shy about stopping people headed over the line. Since there’s always been a huge drug trafficking pipeline through eastern Colorado, I wonder how much the arrest rate has actually changed since legalization.




I suspect those good folks don’t vote. These constituents need a get out the vote campaign, how about “Hotbox the Vote”.

The federal government has every right to ban interstate trade in marijuana, and neighboring states have every right to arrest anyone who buys weed in Colorado from transporting it over the border.

And yes, I know the interpretations of “interstate commerce” have gotten more and more expansive over the years. But, if you can twist words that far from their definitions, then there is little point in having written laws.

The Washington Times???

1 Like

I hadn’t checked the source article. Admittedly, they’re not the worst paper out there, there’s one that I haven’t seen in a while that I remember published dehumanizing anti-immigrant slurs in its top front-page headlines, but they’re pretty bad and have published pro-discrimination anti-trans editorials.

There is a very good chance the Supreme Court won’t even take the case, since they have none and it is a political hot potato.

"The illegal products of this system are heavily trafficked into neighboring states, causing an unnecessary burden on [them]… and I hope the U.S. Supreme Court will uphold our constitutional principles.”

hmm…sounds like we could say the same thing about states with weak gun control laws…can we force them to change their laws too???


The only thing causing “an unnecessary burden on the state of Nebraska” is…Nebraska. Prohibition does not work. Not for alcohol. Not for weed. And of course there’s the entire question of how and why weed became illegal in the first place. Scary black people! Scary Mexicans! Big cotton! (Not kidding on that last one either.)

Whatever the reason, these dumb laws and the reefer madness propaganda over the years are ingrained in a lot of psyches. I’m sure that many of the prohibitionists get together to discuss the evils of weed over a few drinks before driving home to rail at the stars…


This tends to be how things really work at a sociological level. A town is a “real community”, because there is some degree of real-world, non-abstract relationship between the participants. State and especially national bodies are only “imagined communities” where the only thing which holds them together is ideals and other abstract concepts. I am amazed that so many people are easily conditioned to think of countries as real organizations and borders when they have so little to do with people’s daily lives.


A good example here is when something happens and the borders change and suddenly the town falls under a different country. The close social networks of the people in the town are pretty much unchanged. Even the language may stay quite the same despite the new parent country speaking a different one.

But people for some odd reason want some granfalloon (beautiful word) to get united under, whether it is a soccer club or a country flag, and to differ from the others, and are willing to hate and even kill said others just because their respective granfalloon is another one, often not even so much different one.

1 Like

Yay for public education. :smile:

Yeah… haven’t you heard of WaTi?

Me neither.

It might be cause to celebrate if people were taught about the real world they live in, rather than being indoctrinated to gullible belief in other people’s social constructs.

Well, that is why I used a smiley.