Pubdate: Fri, 03 Feb 2012
Source: Missoulian (MT)
Copyright: 2012 Missoulian
Author: Mitch Goulet


I am extremely confused with some recent events and highly reported
stories here in our state that make absolutely no sense and seem to
contradict each other.

First we have Judge Donald Molloy saying federal law trumps Montana's
medical marijuana law. Molloy wrote in his order that providers can be
prosecuted under the federal Controlled Substances Act even if they
are following state law.

Now without getting into state's rights vs. feds here, I understand
his order even if I totally disagree with it. What I seem to be
hearing is that we have to follow federal law no matter what the
citizens of this state vote into law.

So imagine my confusion after reading the following story, which seems
to state otherwise. The recent decision by the Montana Supreme Court
to restore our state's century-old ban on direct spending by
corporations on political candidates and committees is a great victory
for "we the people" of America and for the entire Occupy movement. In
large part, we have Montana's present Attorney General Steve Bullock
to thank for this.

Now correct me if I am wrong, but isn't this EXACTLY the same thing?
Are the judges of Montana now above the Supreme Court of the United
States of America when it pleases them? If they can ignore the laws of
the country then why is it the citizens of Montana are not afforded
the same choice?

I am completely convinced in my mind why this is the case; marijuana
is not as pretty as telling those big bad corporations to stuff it.
Shouldn't these same judges stand up for us Montanans who passed this
law overwhelmingly?

I await those with more insight into this blatant disregard of a
certain group of Montana citizens.

Mitch Goulet

- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard R Smith Jr.