Introduction
The usage of cannabis, from medicinal treatment to recreational marijuana, is gaining attention on the national level, even though there are still opponents of legalized marijuana. The usage of cannabis is becoming more widespread in many states in the U.S. Meanwhile, the federal government has not made the same move. In contrast to state laws, the ambivalence of federal legislation is a key source of the potential conflict between the two branches of power.
Federal Supremacy and the Criminalization of Marijuana
Ultimately, states are unable to alter federal law; therefore, they cannot completely legalize marijuana. Cannabis is still a designated drug under the Controlled Substances Act, according to federal law (Boldt, 2019). This indicates that, like other chemicals like ecstasy and heroin, it is thought to have a significant potential for addiction and does not have any accepted medicinal use. Therefore, all marijuana-related actions are federal crimes in every state, including those that have legalized marijuana under state law (Boldt, 2019). This indicates that one center of power has grown too powerful, while individual rights, such as well-being, are not protected during these disputes.
Conflict Between Federal Authority and State Marijuana Laws
The difference between federal and state-restricted substance regulations is particularly noticeable when it comes to marijuana regulation. Contrary to the severe federal prohibition on marijuana, most states have amended their laws in recent years to permit its usage (Boldt, 2019). As a result, systems intended to balance government authority among institutions and people are ineffective, which is at odds with the Constitution and the Federalist Papers (Hamilton et al., 2018). Federal law is attempting to take control of interstate trade in this situation, which is against the dictates of state law.
Conclusion
Overall, this dispute indicates an ongoing discussion on reforming the existing system. In this case, there is a lack of balancing mechanisms, where state law cannot dictate its will over federal legislation. While the issue is considered national, no visible solutions will satisfy both legislations and resolve the issue.
References
Boldt, E. D. (2019). From Schmerber to Birchfield: The Legal Implications of the Marijuana Legalization Debate and the Court Having Ignored Drugged Driving Jurisprudence. U. Tol. L. Rev., 51(1), 567-572.
Hamilton, A., Madison, J., & Jay, J. (2018). The federalist papers. Oxford University Press.