On guns, Federal Law trumps State Law?

Never mind, I'm way over thinking this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Irving

Martin you misunderstood my question. In general, not at a Federal building, is there a Federal law that says one cannot carry concealed? I'm just clarifying for myself, as I don't think that it is federally illegal.

---

No, the Federal government has no authority to make such a law.

As I said above, State governments have what is called the "General Police Power" that gives states the authority to regulate almost any aspect of life. The only limits on state authority are those actions that are specified as Federal powers, or those actions that are prohibited under the Constitution.

The Federal government, OTOH, is a government of limited and specified powers. IOW, Congress only has the authority to make laws under circumstances that are specified within the Constitution. The Federal government does not have the authority to make laws of general application that apply within the states because that's what the State's police power is for (and that's why the 10th Amendment was put into the original Bill of Rights.)

Obviously, there has been a long history of the Federal government encroaching on the power of the states, and often this was done with the full cooperation and collusion of the states, but that's really a topic for another thread.

The bottom line is this. Under the US Constitution supremacy clause, Federal law does trump state law. So long as the Federal law is itself constitutional. And for the last 8 decades, US Constitutional law has given the Federal government extraordinarily broad powers through the commerce clause. That isn't going to change.

So any argument that the Federal government does not have jurisdiction to prohibit marijuana possession, nor to prohibit gun possession by users of illegal drugs, has no realistic chance of success.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spqrzilla

The bottom line is this. Under the US Constitution supremacy clause, Federal law does trump state law. So long as the Federal law is itself constitutional. And for the last 8 decades, US Constitutional law has given the Federal government extraordinarily broad powers through the commerce clause. That isn't going to change.

So any argument that the Federal government does not have jurisdiction to prohibit marijuana possession, nor to prohibit gun possession by users of illegal drugs, has no realistic chance of success.

---

There have been a number of recent cases where the SCOTUS has slapped down the Federal government and told them that the Commerce Clause is not the blank check they assumed it was. In addition, WRT guns, all the current gun and MJ laws were written before Heller and McDonald. Both of those cases drastically change the landscape regarding what the government can and can't ban. So I would disagree with your last sentence and say that this is probably one of the best times for activists to challenge the Federal government on guns.