[extropy-chat] fanatic anxietist

[Samantha Atkins]

On Jun 8, 2005, at 1:51 PM, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>
>
> --- Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>
> Actually, the SCOTUS just ruled against the state interposition
> argument wrt the medical marijuana laws passed in the last several
> years, ruling that federal authority to regulate interstate commerce
> trumps state laws. The term "channels of commerce" is, AFAIKR, in the
> Constitution as the responsibility of the federal government. I comes
> from the fact that in colonial and early America, there were no real
> roads of any distance that one could ship any real quantity of goods
> over. River channels were the 'channels of commerce' at the time and
> the access that each major coastal city had to the interior via a  
> river
> system tended to determine its economic growth. Boston had the Charles
> and Merrimack river systems, Portsmouth had the Piscataquah, New York
> had the Hudson River (and eventually the Erie Canal), Philadelphia had
> two rivers, etc...
>

So if the reefer is grown and consumed wholly within a state this  
interstate commerce argument is null and void?

- s