State Premption Will Happen Under DJT

Yup
the marxists set all sorts of bad precedent as they engaged in their social engineering

Turnabout is always fair play

File: 1478741850953.png (193KB, 499x478px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 499x478px

>>32773506
Half of me is reluctant to actually enjoy the use of federal powers on the states, even if the states are being unconstitutional motherfuckers, but the other half...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bv3C-RfU2-M

BRING THEM TO HEEL

The Federal government and the State governments should follow the constitution. It is the set of laws that the government must obey. A government that does not follow the laws that dictate what it can and cannot do has no legitimacy passing laws onto the people aside from it's massive advantage in brute physical force.

If they do not like the rules set forth by the constitution, they should fucking amend it. Guess what, the rules for that are in the fucking constitution. Don't like the rules about how to amend the constitution? Amend those. Don't have enough support to pass your bullshit amendments? Not my fucking problem, maybe try making laws that the people actually like, this is a goddamn republic. You aren't entitled to pass whatever laws you like.

State (and federal!) lawmakers should not creatively "interpret" it in obviously bullshit ways, hoping it will take years or decades for the supreme court to slap down their bullshit. Or hoping that a stacked liberal supreme court will let them get away with everything forever. Only with trump taking home a surprise victory do they realize how fucked it is that both the legislative and judicial branch have weaseled their way into de-facto legislative power, through executive orders and far-reaching judicial review. This is NOT how that shit was intended to work. Even then, as far as I can see, the only thing that's getting through their thick fucking skulls is "trump bad".

>>32773506
You better hope dems never get in charge because it works both ways

This might make those marijuana laws tricky


Federal law doesn't trump state law, and state law doesn't trump federa it was written purposely vague for reasons.

The 10rh amendment clearly says the states do everything not covered by the Constitution, of which the 2nd clearly is

>>32773984
The pre-emption game was initiated by the Dems. This is their comeuppance, and once the supreme court decision is handed down, it's unlikely to be reversed unless a new bill is passed through the (republican) congress, the (republican) senate, and survive legal challenge from the (republican) supreme court.

The Dems basically fucked themselves for the next ten legislative sessions, give or take, as both the senate and the house are red, and it's unlikely the senate will change in any of the next 4 election cycles (basically, all republican senators up for re-election in each of the next 3 election cycles would have to lose in order for blue to regain the senate).

>>32774100
Yes, I'd say that drug laws, not being supported or opposed by anything in the constitution, should unambiguously be up to the states as per the 10th amendment. I assume the federal government's involvement is legally based on the "Commerce Clause" of the constitution, which is how they justify all kinds of shit they shouldn't have any say in.

I don't see why they didn't pass a "narcotics prohibition" amendment, I can't imagine it wouldn't have passed had they done so in the 70s or so. Even today, you could probably pass an amendment forbidding everything aside from marijuana. But since there ain't no such amendment, it's not the federal government's jurisdiction.

>>32773859
Amen brother. Been saying this myself for years.

>>32773859
I'm glad someone recognizes what is at stake. I want to reboot the Republic, not turn it into imperial fucking Rome where everything is governed from the center... even if it's to my temporary benefit.

>>32773506
I've always argued that state AWB type laws are unconstitutional since the incorporation of the bill of rights.