American Politics COMPLETE NOTES [Part 4] - I got a 4.0 in the course!

5 Pages
102 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Political Science
Course
POLSCI 101
Professor
All Professors
Semester
Winter

Description
February 18, 2014 1st Paper Assignment: ● Are states’ bans on same sex marriage Constitutional? ● Paper handed out with background of this conflict ○ Can federal government define the parameters around marriage or is this a power reserved to the states? ○ Do states’ bans on same sex marriage violate civil rights and/or civil liberties? ○ Are states’ bans on same sex marriage a violation of Constitution’s full faith and credit and/or priveleges and immunities clauses? ● Organization ○ Provide a thesis statement (MUST HAVE! In first paragraph) ○ Provide an overview of debate concerning same sex marriage ○ Provide evidence that supports your argument ■ Evidence should be political in nature ■ Don’t include “moral” arguments, make “political” arguments ○ Introduce counterargument and undermine ■ What pokes hole in argument in those who support/oppose same sex marriage bans? ○ Conclusions ■ Restate thesis, restate arguments ● 6-9 pages, double spaced, 12 point font, with proper citations VII. Current Debate in Federalism: Legalization of Marijuana ● We discuss a recap of Wednesday’s lecture ● Legalization ● Medicinal/Recreational Use being passed in some states ● More supportive public opinion today ● Legal Justification? ○ The majority of passages of marijuana legalization is a reflection of Will of the People - people voted ○ Constitutional Right (10th Amendment) ■ Define criminal law within borders ■ Protect and define the safety, health, and welfare of citizens ■ States feel emboldened to pass and enforce these laws ■ Federal government doesn’t necessarily agree with this interpretation of the 10th Amendment ○ Federal Government on Marijuana ■ Controlled Substances Act ● Schedule 1 Drug ○ “High Potential for Abuse” ○ “No currently Accepted Medical Use in Treatment” ● Possession, Cultivation, or Distribution is a Federal Crime ● Legal Justification: Interstate Commerce and Supremacy Clause ○ After manufacture, distribution, and possession product travels between states ● Gonzales v. Rich (2003) ○ Federal Government Response ■ Raids and Arrests - Sell, Grow, or Possess ■ Threatened Banks in states which provided any loan to any marijuana distribution centers ● Money laundering for dealing with federally illegal narcotic drug ○ Background ■ Rich Argument: ● Controlled Substance Act is unlawful extension of interstate commerce clause ● 5th and 10th Amendment rights ■ Fed Argument: ● If a single exception is made for marijuana, laws will become unenforceable in practice ● Consuming locally grown marijuana affects interstate market of marijuana (same decision as Wickard v. Filburn) ■ Legal Question ● Does Congress have power to use interstate commerce power to regulate the marijuana industry? Even when it is a personal/private medicinal use? ■ Decision ● Yes, Congress has that power (6-3 decision) ● “No choice but to uphold Congress’s firmly established power to regulate purely local activities…” ● Today ○ Alaska, Oregon, and New York - 23 states? ○ Justice Department (Obama Administration) says: ■ They will no longer seek prosecution for possession, cultivation, or distribution in states that have legalized marijuana use ■ Allow banks to invest ○ Elites: ■ Obama ● 2013 in an i
More Less

Related notes for POLSCI 101

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit