Pubdate: Fri, 17 May 2002
Source: Denver Rocky Mountain News (CO)
Copyright: 2002, Denver Publishing Co.
Contact:  http://www.rockymountainnews.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/371
Author:  Lee Smith
Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v02/n000/a060.html?1188

BOGUS LEGAL PRETEXT

It was good to see Judge John L. Kane come out with so many detailed points 
about why the War on Drugs creates far more problems than it solves 
("America in a fix," April 27). But he still believes that the "importing 
of unauthorized drugs should continue to be a federal crime . . ." This is 
precisely the bogus legal pretext on which the War on Drugs is now waged.

Kane does not discuss the much deeper point that the powers of the federal 
government are enumerated. The power to "authorize" some drugs and 
criminalize others is not one of them. The only authority it has is to tax 
them. He also ignores that there are only three federal crimes -- piracy, 
counterfeiting and treason. Drug use is not one of them.

Why did alcohol prohibition require a constitutional amendment, but not 
drug prohibition? On what basis, then, does Kane and the rest of the 
federal judiciary continue to sanction the blatantly unconstitutional War 
on Drugs?

Lee Smith

Loveland
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom