Unless the federal government wants to get into a serious fight over state’s rights, weed is effectively/wholly legal in states like California (I don’t know the specific laws outside of CA)
If you’d like to argue that the federal government - through the supremacy clause - has the power to override States that legalize marijuana, perhaps you’re right in theory.
But I think it’s a fantasy that the federal government will want to die on that hill. There are politically valuable reasons to avoid addressing the tension between state’s rights and the federal government’s power.
It sounds like we're using different definitions of the word "illegal". It's unfortunate that English makes it cumbersome to draw the necessary distinction.
Given that the federal government has consistently grabbed more power than our founding documents actually gave them, forgive me for not really giving a shit what the federal government's opinion is.
It is a kind of ironic situation. Modern states rights arguments tend to reside on the right, but that is also where anti-drug legalization sentiment resides as well. I'd be very interested to hear a debate where a right winger insists the fed should step in, and a left winger replies "Personally I support states rights". Just to see where it all goes.
If you’d like to argue that the federal government - through the supremacy clause - has the power to override States that legalize marijuana, perhaps you’re right in theory.
But I think it’s a fantasy that the federal government will want to die on that hill. There are politically valuable reasons to avoid addressing the tension between state’s rights and the federal government’s power.