9th Circuit Court say if you have a medical marijuana card you can't buy a gun (party, elect)

[jacqueg]

Originally Posted by Crashj007

He can do that?

Depends on what programs you are talking about, but in general, no, he can't.

Congress could.

[jacqueg]

Originally Posted by MJJersey

So true! I hope Sessions cracks down before the liberals legalize it here.

Shrug. If a majority of the voters in your state want to change your state's drug enforcement laws, there is little that Sessions can do about it.

And no, I really don't see a conservative SCOTUS ruling that states must all enforce federal drug laws.

[legalsea]

For those of you interested in reading the actual Court opinion (rendered in 2016), here it is:


https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10178465751376044815&hl=en&as_sd t=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholar

[MJJersey]

Originally Posted by burdell

Based on what other than personal bias?

History and experience.

[MJJersey]

Originally Posted by jacqueg

Shrug. If a majority of the voters in your state want to change your state's drug enforcement laws, there is little that Sessions can do about it.

And no, I really don't see a conservative SCOTUS ruling that states must all enforce federal drug laws.

Sessions can enforce federal law within a state. And the majority of people did not vote for it. They are too afraid to out the issue to vote here.

[jacqueg]

Originally Posted by MJJersey

Sessions can enforce federal law within a state. And the majority of people did not vote for it. They are too afraid to out the issue to vote here.

Well, of course he can. What he can't do is make states enforce federal drug laws.

As I've repeated many times, the marijuana legalization laws only affect what the states enforce. They don't affect what the feds enforce.

It's always been a patchwork.

[rbohm]

Originally Posted by freemkt

The only way I can see your reasoning is to make a nonrebuttable presumption that holding a medical marijuana card is a stipulation to the use of an illegal substance.

It is certainly plausible that a non-user might obtain a medical marijuana card specifically for the purpose of contesting this nonrebuttable presumption; I expect to see this happen.

On what basis is it (nonrebuttably!) presumed that possession of a medical marijuana card is a stipulation to use of marijuana? Especially if someone announces such a plan to test the rule?

Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber

Is a pot smoker a law abiding citizen, given the fact that pot is illegal according to federal law?

The short answer is no.

Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber

LOL. Obama didn't start medical pot, it started 12 years before he took office.

But Obama......

fin is right on this.

Originally Posted by Casper in Dallas

Are States that allow it breaking Federal Law?

yes they are.

[Crashj007]

Originally Posted by freemkt

<>It is certainly plausible that a non-user might obtain a medical marijuana card specifically for the purpose of contesting this nonrebuttable presumption; I expect to see this happen.
On what basis is it (nonrebuttably!) presumed that possession of a medical marijuana card is a stipulation to use of marijuana? Especially if someone announces such a plan to test the rule?

You may not have read my old post on this point. You also may not have read the case document someone linked in. A person with a card cannot answer the question either way without falsifying the Federal form, which is itself a Federal crime. The Form was submitted to the seller with the question on drug use blank and thus not accepted by the them.
It was moot since the person was known by the seller to hold the marijuana user's card which, by virtue of a BATF memo, was a disqualification to buy a firearm.
Not argued anywhere, is that the holder seems to have obtained the card for precisely the reason you have proposed.
The fact that the card had expired was noted and ignored by the appellate court.
So it seems the puzzle you present was in fact settled by this case.

[mohawkx]

Originally Posted by freemkt

The only way I can see your reasoning is to make a nonrebuttable presumption that holding a medical marijuana card is a stipulation to the use of an illegal substance.

It is certainly plausible that a non-user might obtain a medical marijuana card specifically for the purpose of contesting this nonrebuttable presumption; I expect to see this happen.

On what basis is it (nonrebuttably!) presumed that possession of a medical marijuana card is a stipulation to use of marijuana? Especially if someone announces such a plan to test the rule?

The solution is simple. On the question section of the NICS, when it asked if you are a user of controlled substances, you just answer with the truth and say NO. The question is not "Do you have a medical marijuana card" the question is " do you use schedule 1 substances."

One need to only answer honestly in the scenario you are espousing and they have met all the requirements to own a firearm and not perjured themselves on a federal form.

I honestly think my reasoning is sound on the matter.

[Casper in Dallas]

Originally Posted by Ponderosa

We don't need more drugged up losers in America. Sessions need to cut off funds to states that won't enforce pot laws.

Sessions has his own problems now, ROTFLMAO!