Opinions - Drug use is not just a human right. It's also a constitutional right!

[Expat98]

In addition to drug use being an inalienable human right (see this thread) as such rights are conceived in modern times, it also seems to me that drug use is a constitutional right under the U.S. Constitution. And I am wondering why the constitutionality of the War on Drugs has never been challenged, or even seriously discussed by drug policy reform groups (as far as I am aware)?

The right to use drugs is not directly addressed in the Constitution. However, the 9th amendment specifies that:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

"the enumeration...of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." In other words, just because a certain right is not specifically listed or explicitly protected by the Constitution does not mean that right does not exist. Rather this amendment explicates the principle of government power as a grant from the people, rather than individual rights being a grant from the government.

Also the 10th amendment: Unenumerated rights (i.e., rights not listed) are reserved to the states or to the people. Since California and other states have clearly expressed their will on the issue of medical marijuana, the federal government's refusal to recognize their sovereignty on this issue is a clear violation of the 10th amendment.

I also note that the prohibition of alcohol was enacted by a constitutional amendment (the 18th amendment, which was later repealed by the 21st amendment). Obviously, it was deemed necessary to amend the Constitution in order to prohibit the use of alcohol. It should therefore be necessary to amend the Constitution in order to prohibit the use of other drugs as well. However, there has been no such amendment, which leads me to believe that this right is retained by the people.

Reputation Comments on this post:

	So true - thanks for pointing this out.
	Very impressive argument.

[ADVOR]

Find an excrutiatingly amazing lawyer and challenge the Supreme Court. Good luck.

This was not in sarcasm. If you can try, go for it. I completely agree with this and I have discussed it before.

[NoLaurelTree000]

i totally agree with you but the biggest huddle that a court decision would have to deal with is there is no premise or mention of the right to privacy in the constitution. my politics professor always talked about how he believes that there needs to be an admendment to the constitution garunteeing the right to privacy and i 100% agree with him. if you could get an admendment garunteeing the right to privacy, it would all but gauruntee that drug use would be legalized.

the constitution often hints at the right of privacy, but never explicitly comes out and guarantees it. i think it would be easier and better to go about adding an amendment giving the right to privacy, then getting the legalization of drugs afterwards.

[stoneinfocus]

Because all speaking out againt the mainstream opinions, which is more and more influencd and set by the conservatives, are shut up in hundred legal ways... not seen/heard on air/TV, fired and made to filling up the reserve army of unemployeds (germany alerady managed to make them then take on any job, that will be offered to them, by the agency of work, or taking part in any kind of surrogate activity, or learning into another job a.s.a.p., like prisoners do, in the USA, with the choice of getting sanctioned their wellfare, stepwise, up(dwon*g*) to zero, handing them out eating coupons).

You could make them crash in an accident, or murder them and get away with it, by palcing rap-music into their pockets.

[givemeliberty]

Originally Posted by Expat98

In addition to drug use being an inalienable human right (see this thread) as such rights are conceived in modern times, it also seems to me that drug use is a constitutional right under the U.S. Constitution. And I am wondering why the constitutionality of the War on Drugs has never been challenged, or even seriously discussed by drug policy reform groups (as far as I am aware)?

The right to use drugs is not directly addressed in the Constitution. However, the 9th amendment specifies that:


Also the 10th amendment: Unenumerated rights (i.e., rights not listed) are reserved to the states or to the people. Since California and other states have clearly expressed their will on the issue of medical marijuana, the federal government's refusal to recognize their sovereignty on this issue is
a clear violation of the 10th amendment.

I also note that the prohibition of alcohol was enacted by a constitutional amendment (the 18th amendment, which was later repealed by the 21st amendment). Obviously, it was deemed necessary to amend the Constitution in order to prohibit the use of alcohol. It should therefore be necessary to amend the Constitution in order to prohibit the use of other drugs as well. However, there has been no such amendment, which leads me to believe that this right is retained by the people.

Exactly! Why aren't people pissed off about this? It's absurd that the DEA even exists? Where does the Constitution enumerate that the Government can legislate morality? The whole damn thing makes me so mad I could scream at the stupid cattle in this country who don't even know that their rights as written in the Constitution are being jerked right out from under their stupid noses while Bush (any damn politician for that matter) waves patriotism in our faces . It's a slight of hand trick. Divert our attention over here and steal our wallets. It's unbelievable to me that we aren't all up in arms over this.
I talked top a guy the other day who had spent many years in France. Say what you want about the French but the French government is afraid of the people. The French have riots about politics. I mean drag out, knock them down, burn them alive riots. The French know how to demonstrate and scare the shit out of the politicians.
Here, we are scared of our government. We want to demonstrate, first we ask if it's ok with them by applying for a permit. We'll be arrested if we don't. Then we politely walk up and down the street carrying our signs while the cops wait for their chance to arrest us.
There was an experiment at Harvard a few years ago. They put a rat in a cage and every couple of hours someone would reach in and poke at the rat with a stick. For the first few days, the rat fought back and protested. After a week, the rat hardly even noticed. He would just lay there. Sounds like a U.S. citizen, huh?
They've been poking at us for years and years and we have actually begun to like it.
The whole damn thing makes me sick. I'm waiting for the Feds to show up at my door one day to explain all the letters I write to that asshole Bush.