Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is widely known as perhaps the most conservative judge on the bench.
But what he said recently stunned some critics.
Thomas targeted the federal government and said that it’s time for a major change for a longtime law.
According to The Hill and other multiple sources, Thomas claimed that the federal laws regulating marijuana in the U.S. “may no longer be necessary.”
And he blasted the government’s handling of the marijuana industry, saying its “willingness to often look the other way on marijuana is more episodic than coherent.”
His words came as part of the Supreme Court’s denial of a Colorado medical marijuana dispensary that was appealing its failure to receive federal tax breaks. The Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal.
Thomas reiterated that the federal government’s laws around marijuana are often confusing and contradictory.
“A prohibition on interstate use or cultivation of marijuana may no longer be necessary or proper to support the federal government’s piecemeal approach,” Thomas wrote.
Put simply, he’s saying that marijuana regulation is outdated.
He cited the landmark 2005 case Gonzalez v. Raich, which affirmed the federal mandate that the production and use of marijuana may be criminalized — even for medical purposes — despite state by state laws that allow use.
Thomas is arguing that times have changed.
“Whatever the merits of Raich when it was decided, federal policies of the past 16 years have greatly undermined its reasoning.”
“Once comprehensive, the Federal Government’s current approach is a half-in, half-out regime that simultaneously tolerates and forbids local use of marijuana.”
“This contradictory and unstable state of affairs strains basic principles of federalism and conceals traps for the unwary,” he also noted.
Based on The Hill reporting, 18 states have approved the recreational use of marijuana and 36 states have permitted its medical use.
We want to hear from you.
Do you agree with Clarence Thomas?
Vote here --