Jump to content

Midland County Judge: Medical Pot Law Is Illegal


Recommended Posts

A Midland County judge’s recent ruling that the state’s medical marijuana act is unconstitutional has Oakland County medical marijuana supporters and detractors speculating on what may come next.

 

The opinion, written by Midland County Circuit Court Judge Jonathan Lauderbach, addresses two separate cases involving probation conditions and the use of medical marijuana.

 

“This is truly a battle between the federal government and state government,” said Samantha Moffett, marijuana business consultant with Walled Lake-based Ambrose Law Group.

 

Moffett’s reference to the two governments going head to head springs from Lauderbach’s opinion, where he wrote that the courts are bound by the Supremacy Clause — guided first by the U.S. Constitution and federal laws.

 

That means, he concluded, even if defendants prove they are seriously ill and use medical marijuana to ease symptoms, Lauderbach stated, the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act — passed by voters in 2008 — is unconstitutional and “therefore must be declared to be ‘without effect,’” according to his opinion outlined in a story in the Midland Daily News.

 

This sets up the possibility of the Michigan Court of Appeals weighing in on medical marijuana, said Moffett.

 

Oakland County Prosecutor Jessica Cooper said this opinion validates Oakland County law enforcement officials’ position on medical marijuana.

 

“(The opinion says) the same thing we have been saying,” she said. In the past, county prosecutors have said distributing marijuana is against federal law.

 

“I find (the opinion) interesting. Across the state, every time (medical marijuana cases) get into court and you see court analysis, you’ll see they look at the statute very narrowly.”

 

She believes the Midland situation is “one more piece” in the overall medical marijuana discussion.

 

The issue in Midland involved two defendants — Jonathon Murray Finney, 29, and Todd Alan VanWert, 46, both of Midland — who were sentenced for offenses including marijuana possession. The court ordered the men, who both said they were qualified to use marijuana, to stay away from marijuana.

 

Moffett said 15 states and the District of Columbia which have legalized marijuana on some level.

 

If the act is deemed unconstitutional in Michigan, “I believe we are going to see similar challenges in other states,” said Moffett.

 

Cooper said she believes it will take another two years before medical marijuana cases “wind their way to the Michigan Supreme Court” and before there is a “definitive statement” on the act here.

 

Neil Rockind, an attorney currently defending medical marijuana patients in Oakland County courts, said other states with medical marijuana laws have dealt with the state vs. federal law question.

 

“In California this issue was addressed, decided, appealed and reaffirmed and each and every time it was concluded the state’s medical marijuana act and the federal controlled substance law can operate together,” he said, adding even Congress has said the federal substance acts do not pre-empt state medical marijuana laws.

 

“This (Midland) decision is only going to complicate things. I believe the Midland judge made an error, and (his decision) is going to be reversed.”

 

 

http://www.dailytribune.com/articles/2011/06/21/news/doc4e013c427a339133142711.txt

Edited by medicineman420
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When will we be free of these tyranny laws.When a sick and dying patient can,t grow a plant to help there condition where is the freedom in this country.The people have spoken but the tyranny stays the same.Voting in this country means nothing when you take the will of the people away.We the people are being violated.PERIOD!!!!! Ask yourself what are you and you alone going to do about it.I pray there is a uprising that this country country hasn,t seen since Boston Tea Party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, I am not going to speak very smartly on this, but the constitution doesn't grant the right to the federal government to prohibit any drugs. And the 10th amendment states that anything not "granted" to the feds falls to the state and the people. To Start prohibition for alcohol, they needed a constituional amendment. Why and how do they not need one for Marijuana? The 18th amendment prohibited it, and the 21st repealed it. If they knew back then they needed a constitutional amendment to prohibit Alcohol, a much worse drug then MJ, why don't we need one for this?

 

Also, states can nullify Federal Gun laws by using this tactic. Why can't MMJ nullify Federal laws? Well I know why, we don't have the NRA behind us and their millions and millions of dollars and lobbyists.

 

Anyway, this judge is obviously not a constitutional judge, doesn't understand it well...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When will we be free of these tyranny laws.When a sick and dying patient can,t grow a plant to help there condition where is the freedom in this country.The people have spoken but the tyranny stays the same.Voting in this country means nothing when you take the will of the people away.We the people are being violated.PERIOD!!!!! Ask yourself what are you and you alone going to do about it.I pray there is a uprising that this country country hasn,t seen since Boston Tea Party.

 

Sadly to say not until we have another revolution will we be able to have our Freedom Back do not get me wrong I am not suggesting that we start one but as Thomas Jefferson said to maintain our Freedom we would need a revolution about every 20 years I guess he was right until that happens we will just have to be content in living in a country that does not have Freedom but only hypocrisy. That Is why I no longer celebrate the 4th of July or display the American Flag and will not until Freedom returns to America.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly to say not until we have another revolution will we be able to have our Freedom Back do not get me wrong I am not suggesting that we start one but as Thomas Jefferson said to maintain our Freedom we would need a revolution about every 20 years I guess he was right until that happens we will just have to be content in living in a country that does not have Freedom but only hypocrisy. That Is why I no longer celebrate the 4th of July or display the American Flag and will not until Freedom returns to America.

Its not a matter of Freedom returning, Freedom is here.

 

Unfortunately, Freedom is being ganged raped by our elected officials.

 

The Republican's slipped Freedom some Roofies, and the Democrats couldn't help themselves after they saw Freedom's skirt hiked up over her head.

 

The Dems just wait until the Reps are 'done' before they get their kicks with Freedom's ravaged body.

 

I use the rape analogy, because I believe Freedom and Woman are treated with the same disregard and disdain in the reality of today's blatantly "Humans as Commodity" America.

 

You want Freedom back, well your gonna have to fight for her.

Fight to pull that pile of pants-less politicians, pundits and businessmen off of her.

And do try not to blame the victim...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not a matter of Freedom returning, Freedom is here.

 

Unfortunately, Freedom is being ganged raped by our elected officials.

 

The Republican's slipped Freedom some Roofies, and the Democrats couldn't help themselves after they saw Freedom's skirt hiked up over her head.

 

The Dems just wait until the Reps are 'done' before they get their kicks with Freedom's ravaged body.

 

I use the rape analogy, because I believe Freedom and Woman are treated with the same disregard and disdain in the reality of today's blatantly "Humans as Commodity" America.

 

You want Freedom back, well your gonna have to fight for her.

Fight to pull that pile of pants-less politicians, pundits and businessmen off of her.

And do try not to blame the victim...

You are correct the only way we will be able to get our freedom back is to take up arms and fight for it like has been done in the past but most Americans even the ones who are disgusted with our Government and its actions do not have the stomach or nerve to stand up and fight for there freedom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

State judges can rule on the constitutionality of a law. If they couldn't then much of the constitutional criminal law issues that the US Sup Ct hears would never make it there because much of the decisions in that area began as a violation of a state law.

 

Similarly, a judge can rule whether a search and seizure was reasonable under the US Const. State judges routinely have to review an issue and rule based on the US Const.

Ok, why then did California go the completely opposite direction? I outlined this in another post, but basically CA courts determined that Federal Law cannot trump state law. Not in things that don't affect multiple states. District, Circuit and Supreme Courts in CA said, yeah, State Law is the final word on Marijuana...

 

Why isn't that the same in MI? Well besides having a bunch of jack hole Repubs in MI that think they want small government, but they want that Government to control every aspect of a persons life.

 

Cedar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

State judges can rule on the constitutionality of a law. If they couldn't then much of the constitutional criminal law issues that the US Sup Ct hears would never make it there because much of the decisions in that area began as a violation of a state law.

 

Similarly, a judge can rule whether a search and seizure was reasonable under the US Const. State judges routinely have to review an issue and rule based on the US Const.

 

 

State judges can rule on the constitutionality of state law, they and agents of the state can enforce state law. The Feds enforce federal law. This has been ruled on many times. State officials can only enforce state laws. I think your confused because a lot of state law mirrors federal law. This judge in midland is clearly wrong, and as long as he draws a state check, he is a state employee, and has no more federal standing than you or I. If you were right we would not have prop one in MI or 215 in CA.........shredder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of them are............................

 

 

 

Midland County Circuit Court Judge Jonathan Lauderbach can't work those heels the way Curry does.

Lauderbach tries his best, but he just doesn't have the calves for it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone needs to point a lawyer to the united states vs Arizona were a federal judge stated that it is not up to the state and local officers to enforce festal laws that is why we have the FBI, DEA, and border police. Arizona trying to pass the illegal aliens act they had got shot down so this judge needs to be schooled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone else sense the hand of our State Attorney General, Bill Schuette, a native Midlander, in directing these efforts to undermine the will of the people of the State of Michigan? First, he puts up no resistance to a court order from the Feds to hand over personal information protected by the MMA (defend states' rights? - nahhh), and now this "unconstitutional" claim by an associate. I wonder how he'll weigh in on this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone else sense the hand of our State Attorney General, Bill Schuette, a native Midlander, in directing these efforts to undermine the will of the people of the State of Michigan? First, he puts up no resistance to a court order from the Feds to hand over personal information protected by the MMA (defend states' rights? - nahhh), and now this "unconstitutional" claim by an associate. I wonder how he'll weigh in on this?

 

 

Bet ya he has Constitution Toilet Paper in his office, but at home he has JD on the rocks and pops pills

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find his reliance on the supremacy clause as justification for his ruling a bit perplexing considering his constituency. Midland County is home to the Mackinac Center after all, not exactly the type of folks you'd expect to be happy about an elected official taking 27 pages to remind you that the federal government says how things are going to be in Michigan.

Call me crazy, but I have a thought...

How would a local judge go about getting noticed for a federal appointment?

:sword:

I am ashamed to be a product of the same schools, peers and teachers as him!

Here he had a chance to give DC a big ol' middle finger just like 65% of the voters in MI! He could have taken 27 pages to lay out the legal reasons why the federal government CAN'T legislate morality in the individual states. Instead, he took the easy way and had his paralegals type up 27 pages of drivel that ignore the first 3 words of the document he uses as his justification.

We the People, Jon.

Shame on you for siding with the Statists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share



×
×
  • Create New...