Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
Line 4: Line 4:     
As explained on October 2, 2022, by ''Politico'':<ref>https://www.politico.com/news/2022/10/02/courts-could-throw-state-marijuana-markets-into-disarray-00058029</ref>
 
As explained on October 2, 2022, by ''Politico'':<ref>https://www.politico.com/news/2022/10/02/courts-could-throw-state-marijuana-markets-into-disarray-00058029</ref>
−
{{cquote|The 2-1 opinion by the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals was focused on Maine’s medical marijuana program, but many experts believe the same legal justification could open up interstate commerce nationwide. And two prior federal court rulings also struck down residency requirements as unconstitutional.
+
{{cquote|The 2-1 opinion by the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals was focused on [[Maine]]’s medical marijuana program, but many experts believe the same legal justification could open up interstate commerce nationwide. And two prior federal court rulings also struck down residency requirements as unconstitutional.
    
“This [decision] really portends the emergence of a national market in cannabis,” said Robert Mikos, a Vanderbilt legal scholar and expert on federalism and drug laws. “We will see changes to state import and export bans.”}}
 
“This [decision] really portends the emergence of a national market in cannabis,” said Robert Mikos, a Vanderbilt legal scholar and expert on federalism and drug laws. “We will see changes to state import and export bans.”}}
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,468

edits

Navigation menu