SUPREME COURT RULED FEDERAL LAWS PARAMOUNT

It is unfortunate that Rep. Joe Bertram has proffered the notion of
"dual sovereignty" on medical marijuana as if it were an established
legal principle exempting Hawaii from federal law (Viewpoint, Feb.
13).

The U.S. Constitution gives Congress the authority to make laws within
the constitutional framework that govern all people in all states,
even if some states don't agree. The U.S. Supreme Court is the final
arbiter in the interpretation and application of the Constitution and
those laws, not the states. There is no "sovereignty" of the states
equal to the U.S. government.

Some states once used the "dual sovereignty" argument to support
slavery, claiming that any state had the right to nullify any federal
law. That notion also underlies the "states' rights" position that was
used to justify segregation, suppress voters' rights and implement
criminal laws against disfavored types of people. It is sad irony that
Mr. Bertram would rely on that theory.

The U.S. Supreme Court has most recently addressed the medical
marijuana issue in Gonzales v. Raich. A clear majority of the court
ruled in an opinion by the most liberal Justice that Congress has
plenary power over the regulation of controlled substances, in
particular marijuana, and states can't carve out exceptions to the
federal law.

I think the decision was misguided, but it is the "supreme law of the
land" under our Constitution. In this sense it does "trump" any state
law or state attorney general's opinion.

Robert Faux

Makawao