Supervisors should heed voters, who tend to get last word

By: JIM TRAGESER - Staff Writer | Saturday, December 10, 2005 8:19 PM PST ∞

There are times in history when elected leaders must follow their consciences and go against the popular will, moments when democratic leadership requires a bit of defiance of the mood of the electorate because history stands at a crossroads ---- and the unpopular decision may be the right one.

But those moments are rare, for the very heart of democracy is its pledge to enable the people to make their own decisions, either directly or through their representatives.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt defying the nation's broad sense of neutrality early in World War II and supplying the British is one such rare example. Lyndon Baines Johnson's defiance of the nation's deep-rooted racism to bring the government on board the civil rights movement is another.

County Supervisor Bill Horn and his fellow supervisors seem to believe we're at another such critical juncture in history ---- how else to explain their decision to sue to overturn the state's voter-approved medical marijuana law?

The board rather sensibly points out that the conflict between state law (approving of medicinal use of marijuana) and federal law (which bans it) puts the county in an odd position.

A few weeks back, the board voted to refuse state requirements to issue medical marijuana ID cards and maintain a medical marijuana user database. If a bit petulant, it seemed no more unseemly than the voters of California thumbing their noses at federal drug legislation when we approved the medical marijuana ballot measure.

But there is something very untoward about the board's latest decision, something very undemocratic about elected officials suing to overturn the voters' will.

Besides, the Board of Supervisors' argument that the state medical marijuana law should be superseded by federal drug law is moot ---- a recent court decision upholding both the state and federal laws was the right one, and one made clear by revisiting one of the defining Supreme Court decisions, Prigg vs. Pennsylvania.

Issued in 1842, Prigg revolved around a federal law regarding fugitive slaves. Like many free states, Pennsylvania had passed its own law making it harder for slave owners to forcibly recover slaves who had escaped to the North.

The Supreme Court issued a ruling worthy of Solomon: Congress cannot compel the states to enforce federal laws, but neither may states hinder federal agents in the course of their duties in enforcing said federal legislation.

And while two different versions of the federal Fugitive Slave Law were both repealed by Congress in 1864, the principles behind Prigg remain good law. These principles are the reason, for instance, that state and local enforcement agencies are under no obligation to arrest alleged illegal immigrants for violation of (federal) immigration law.

The precedent of Prigg is also what led a federal court earlier this year to allow state medical marijuana laws to stay on the books while also allowing the federal government to continue enforcing federal legislation making marijuana illegal.

There is absolutely no reason for the county to sue to overturn the state medical marijuana law: Unless the state sues to force the county's hand (which, given the recent federal ruling that basically gutted the potential effectiveness of the state law, the state may well be reluctant to do), why ratchet up the political tension on this issue?

The voters approved the medical marijuana law. In picking this particular windmill at which to tilt, Horn and his brethren may find that the voters don't like being defied.

Horn is to face the voters in next June's primary; spending the months from then to now lecturing voters on why they were wrong on medical marijuana may not be the best re-election strategy.

Contact staff writer Jim Trageser at (760) 740-5424 or jtrageser@nctimes.com.

First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.