|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: iowa caucus results [Re: johnm214]
#7835562 - 01/05/08 01:19 PM (16 years, 27 days ago) |
|
|
He would be impeached for failing to carry out the duties of his office. Further, only a tiny portion of drug prosecutions are made by federal courts. Almost all are done by the states, and there is nothing he can do to make that go away.
--------------------
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: iowa caucus results [Re: zappaisgod]
#7836044 - 01/05/08 03:20 PM (16 years, 27 days ago) |
|
|
oh yeah, I agree w/ you regarding the largely-irrelevant nature of federal decriminilization or legalisation of drugs, but its still the right thing to do... especially for the potheads/sickies in cali and other states getting raided for medical marijuana..... and those who don't want to pay taxes to the govt to lock up drug dealers
Do you have a source for your statement that he could be impeached for not executing the drug laws? I had wondered about that too. I know some states have laws that the sherrif or police chiefs can be prosecuted for failing to enforce the law as written, just wondering if there is any authority compelling the presidenct to enforce laws he doesn't care for?
I'm sure it would be a huge scandal, and the senate can do what they want, but I'm not sure there's legal authority for the prop. that he must enforce all laws- (why not simply defer to the states on every drug prosecution? It's hard to imagine an instance where a federal crime could not be prosecuted under state law, unless in areas of exclusive federal jurisdiction, where there really isn't a constitutional problem w/ fed. drug laws anyways)
|
Phred
Fred's son


Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 18 days
|
Re: iowa caucus results [Re: Minstrel]
#7836271 - 01/05/08 04:12 PM (16 years, 27 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
You'd do well to cite where you got such facts, otherwise you'd just look like an asshole out to slander someone....oops
It was from the video of one of his appearances on Meet the Press or Fox News Sunday or something like that, where all the Ronulans were crowing that he absolutely slaughtered the interviewer (whom they assumed was hostile to Paul -- was it Chris Matthews?). I honestly can't remember which thread it was in, but I think it might have been one started by gettingjiggywithit, and I don't think it is much older than a couple of weeks.
The problem with finding it is that there are so many damn Ron Paul threads. Seems for the last couple of months at least three out of ten threads have something to do with The Only Man Who Can Save America.
Phred
--------------------
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: iowa caucus results [Re: zappaisgod]
#7836455 - 01/05/08 04:57 PM (16 years, 27 days ago) |
|
|
I think there is a pretty solid argument that he couldn't just refuse to enforce drug laws, however; I believe he could certainly direct the justice department not to prosecute when a state has concurent jurisdiction.
From article II sec 3 "...he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States."
Interestingly enough, this is an argument against Bush's use of signing statements as well. But I would imagine both Bush and Paul could say that they must first upheld the constitution- though this likely wouldn't fly as the Supreme Court has allready ruled on the commerce clause in relation to at least pot, and found it covers any drug anywhere, pretty much. The commerce clause really seems meaningless in this regard.
|
|