States Rights Separation Act

    1) Hereafter all federal acts, bills, regulations shall only apply to interstate commerce and not be extended to state declared legal activities wholly within a state unless there is a separate section defining how they effect the internal state activities.

    2) These separate sections must separable in that they must be voted upon separately, be veto-able separately, as well as be able to be declared unconstitutionally separately.

    3) Specifically the laws dealing with marijuana shall not be extended to the states that have, or may, pass laws permitting such use.

    4) The congress may pass other specific sections to existing bills that limit their application to interstate commerce if they so choose.


I am suggesting that the proceeding "States Rights Separation Act", SRSA, be passed by the US government to allow the states to reasonably independent. It is my hope that it allow the congress to do what it does now, but still provide, as a default, that federal laws, regulations, etc. do not automatically limit the states.

This act allows the federal government to specify when they need the states follow a law, but otherwise it permits the states to enact their own laws.


I plan to submit this to my representatives, other blogs, and some lawyers to determine if this act is legal, how it should be re-written and if it is possible to have it passed by the congress.

It is hoped that there will be suggestions as to how the act might improved as well as comments that indicate approval or disapproval.

Also see:

The New Republic. on the decision

My opinion on the decision

New York Times news on the decision

Paul Compos on the decision

Nick Gillespie, of Reason magazine on the decision

Support: H.R. 2087, the "States' Rights to Medical Marijuana Act" discussed over at the Drug War Rant

Wall Street Journal on the decision

The Talent Show on the decision

D. T. Armentano on the decision, Lew Rockwell


Post a Comment

<< Home