Defending medical marijuana use

As a Montana attorney and Republican candidate for State House District 4, I filed an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs in the federal appellate case Montana Caregivers LLC, et. al. v. United States, et. al. (12-35110).

The thrust of my argument penetrates the basis of this issue — how far can Congress overreach the Tenth Amendment? I argue, Congress’ commerce power has gone too far, and the courts need to reexamine the “substantial effects” doctrine as applied over the past 80 years to maintain our federal union.

To ignore this fine balance more than shakes our Constitution’s very foundation.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas opened this door of opportunity in the constitutional discussion when he exclaimed in U.S. v. Lopez (1995) that the substantial effects doctrine must be reexamined given its destructive effect upon the Tenth Amendment. Thomas is right.

Thomas’ vision is all the more necessary given the federal government’s maltreatment of Montana and its citizens in March 2011 when it raided, without regard, Montana-licensed businesses and caregivers for acting in pursuance of Montana’s Medical Marijuana laws. Quite unfortunately, Montana’s state government did nothing to protect our own citizens.

Like marijuana or not, we must defend our Constitution’s federal nature and limit Congress’ power to intrude upon our ability to self-govern where those matters were reserved to the states and people respectively.

Tim Baldwin is the Republican candidate for House District 4