Thomas Veil
Suspended
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2020
- Posts
- 3,450
This is the last guy I expected to offer this opinion.
www.nbcnews.com
His argument seems to be, if you’re gonna have a hodge-lodge of states where it’s illegal, legal, or legal for medicinal use only, what’s the point in having federal laws?
I have to say I agree with him.
Note, please, he’s not saying states can’t keep it illegal.

Clarence Thomas says federal laws against marijuana may no longer be necessary
"The federal government's current approach is a half-in, half-out regime that simultaneously tolerates and forbids local use of marijuana,” the conservative Supreme Court justice wrote.

His argument seems to be, if you’re gonna have a hodge-lodge of states where it’s illegal, legal, or legal for medicinal use only, what’s the point in having federal laws?
I have to say I agree with him.

Note, please, he’s not saying states can’t keep it illegal.