Could an executive order issue Marijuana stamps for all US citizens?

Mar 2019
500
144
DE, US
#1
I'm not advocating for such an executive order and prefer the discussion to only involve the legality of such an executive order, something I've wondered about long ago and have never asked.

It's my understanding marijuana was made illegal by requiring a stamp to possess or sell it and never issuing the stamp, so I was wondering if an executive order could direct the cabinet member involved to issue such a stamp to all our citizens?

Please feel free to offer any correction or additional input, because it isn't a topic I have researched extensively and I'll see what information I can find, too.

There could easily have been other laws since the first law requiring a stamp to essentially make marijuana illegal in the US.
 
Mar 2019
500
144
DE, US
#2
The way I understand the laws about marijuana is the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 was determined to be unconstitutional in the 1969 Leary v United States decision, because it violated the 5th Amendment and later laws, which have been upheld by the Supreme Court, are now in full effect. The Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 was repealed by the Comprehensive Drug Abuse and Control Act of 1970. An executive order wouldn't change the exiting laws and only Congress could repeal or change them. An executive order issuing a stamp would be meaningless.
 
Mar 2019
500
144
DE, US
#4
It is very odd how excise taxes were originally used to regulate drugs when it was believed the Federal government didn't have the authority to regulate medicines and only states had that authority under Article 10. The Harrison Narcotics Act of 1914 taxed opiates and coca. The Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 was kept separate, because it was feared adding it to the Harrison Narcotics Act could prompt legal action. 56 years later the entire concept of what was constitutional for the federal government completely changed.
 
Dec 2018
2,509
1,386
the Heart of America
#6
The way I understand the laws about marijuana is the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 was determined to be unconstitutional in the 1969 Leary v United States decision, because it violated the 5th Amendment and later laws, which have been upheld by the Supreme Court, are now in full effect. The Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 was repealed by the Comprehensive Drug Abuse and Control Act of 1970. An executive order wouldn't change the exiting laws and only Congress could repeal or change them. An executive order issuing a stamp would be meaningless.
Maybe Trump would declare an emergency to get everyone off his ass by giving everyone an ounce of pot.
 
Mar 2019
500
144
DE, US
#7
Obviously, ggelsrinc is referring to the federal government, but could it be done at the state level where it has been legalized?
No, according to all the laws and decisions I've read, because previous US Supreme Court decisions have ruled against the states in modern times.

The first law dealing with drugs involved just honest labeling with the 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act. Prior to it, a product could be called anything and it's contents kept secret. There was a big time drug problem in those days with very strong amounts of narcotics being sold without even knowledge they were present. The attitude of those times was it's an individual's responsibility to take care of themselves, but it was argued the public needed to know what they were getting to make a logical decision. With the 1906 Act passed, you know if you are taking cocaine or heroin, which is many times more potent than opium.

The problem with only that solution is those drugs are very addicting, so the lawmakers tried to do more good with the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act of 1914. It had penalties for doctors prescribing narcotics to addicts and doctors were jailed for doing so. About midway to the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937, a case was brought before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled in Linder v United States (1925) that the federal government has no power to regulate medical practice. That's why marijuana was not added to the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act.

Since those early days, so many laws and Supreme Court decisions have be made that only making new law in Congress could change existing law. The Supreme Court has even sided with existing laws that changed Linder v United States.

I doubt the Supreme Court would ever stand up to make judicial law the law the land and go back to the federal government has no authority to regulate medical practice. The ball is definitely in the the hands of our Federal Congress and not any state laws. States can make laws the Federal Government doesn't want to enforce, but can't make marijuana legal in their own state. The window when a Executive Order could have instructed the Treasury Department to issue stamps closed long ago.

There are so many stupid federal laws about marijuana from about 1970, that any behavior outside of those laws with marijuana is very risky. The federal government won't give a damn about the medical use of marijuana for many years, IMHO, except not enforce existing laws.

It's easy to research, but I don't see any loopholes after the 1970 Controlled Substances Act was passed.
 
Sep 2013
41,604
33,054
On a hill
#10
I'm not advocating for such an executive order and prefer the discussion to only involve the legality of such an executive order, something I've wondered about long ago and have never asked.

It's my understanding marijuana was made illegal by requiring a stamp to possess or sell it and never issuing the stamp, so I was wondering if an executive order could direct the cabinet member involved to issue such a stamp to all our citizens?

Please feel free to offer any correction or additional input, because it isn't a topic I have researched extensively and I'll see what information I can find, too.

There could easily have been other laws since the first law requiring a stamp to essentially make marijuana illegal in the US.
18 states do require stamps,

Legal Issues
 

Similar Discussions