East Valley Tribune

June 19, 2013 | 04:23 pm
East Valley Tribune Facebook East Valley Tribune Twitter East Valley Tribune Mobile Version East Valley Tribune Facebook

Judge rules in favor of Arizona's medical marijuana dispensaries

Welcome to the discussion.

5 comments:

  • Arizona Willie posted at 10:27 am on Wed, Dec 5, 2012.

    Arizona Willie Posts: 1988

    Gov. Brewer, Horne, and Montgomery have violated their Oath of Office to defend the Constitution of the State of Arizona and the laws of the State of Arizona.

    Instead of defending the law of the State of Arizona they have abused their position and use taxpayer money to file lawsuits trying to overturn a valid state law because they didn't agree with it.

    Nowhere does the State Constitution give them the power to set aside or impede a valid State Law because they don't like it.

    They abused their authority by ordering state employees to refuse to do their duty under the State Law.

    That is probably a criminal action.

    They have lost every court action they have filed against this law.

    This Gang of Three should be arrested by Sheriff Joe and charged With Abuse of Authority, interfering with state employees, and preventing businesses from operating under a valid state law.

     
  • JoeDaWg82 posted at 8:59 am on Wed, Dec 5, 2012.

    JoeDaWg82 Posts: 3

    As a life long republican let me be the first to say BRAVO. These two clowns are an embarrassment to conservatives everywhere, they need to be reminded of their place. They are our employees, nothing more, nothing less. The will of the people isn't some catchy phrase in a history book, it has meaning. The people have clearly spoken on this issue, and our decision is final. Federal law is a federal problem, the feds are free to enforce federal law anytime they like. What they cannot do is force a state to criminalize behavior, that's never been up for debate. These two nanny state freaks have wasted our time, our tax dollars, made a mockery out of the state, and all for what? To fight democracy, to spit on the voters, to put their own personal biases ahead of their duty to fight for the will of the people. If either of these two federal lap dogs have a problem with democracy they need to resign and take their stupidity to china. We don't need anymore fake republicans who try to shove the nanny state down our throat, they are a disgrace.

     
  • JT-Foxx posted at 2:06 am on Wed, Dec 5, 2012.

    JT-Foxx Posts: 1

    JT Foxx is here to give and serve you because together, we are the difference in each other's success. Check out JT Foxx if you are ready to join me in this fight to stay ahead of an ever-changing market economy.

     
  • wellreadone posted at 8:24 pm on Tue, Dec 4, 2012.

    wellreadone Posts: 38

    Voters cast their vote, majority rules and that is OK.

    Horne and Montgomery are gutless weasels for questioning the will of the people. Both are lawyers AND bureaucrats, which makes for some amazing ignorance.

     
  • Leon Ceniceros posted at 7:16 pm on Tue, Dec 4, 2012.

    Leon Ceniceros Posts: 2615

    "Now isn't that interesting".....as the Church Lady used to say on SNL.

    IF THE CITIZENS VOTE TO DO SOMETHING ILLEGAL UNDER FEDERAL LAW THAT IT'S.........OK.

    WELL WHAT IF THE CITIZENS OF A STATE VOTED TO APPROVE THE SALE OF FULLY AUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPONS...WOULD THAT BE OK BY THIS JUDGE'S RULING... ???

    OR SAY THAT THE CITIZENS OF A STATE (CALIFORNIA...MAYBE) VOTED TO APPROVE CHILD PORNOGRAPY... EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE FEDERAL LAWS AGAINST IT.......WOULD THAT BE OK BY THIS JUDGE'S RULING....???

    OR SAY THA THE CITIZENS OF A STATE (TAKE FOR EXAMPLE...OUT OF THE CLEAR BLUE SKY....UTAH) VOTED TO APPROVE POLYGAMY OR UNDERAGE WEDDING WITH 12YR OLDS....EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE FEDERAL LAWS AGAINST IT....WOULD THAT BE OK BY THIS JUDGE'S RULING....???

    WHY NOT JUST GET SOME WHITE ERASURE FLUID AND OPEN UP THE DISPLAY CASE OF THE COPY OF THE US CONSTITUTION AND "WHITE OUT"....THOSE SENTENCES REFERING TO........"FEDERAL SUPRMACY"....ALL TOGETHER...............ACCORDING TO THIS JUDGE'S CONCEPTION OF HOW "SUPREME".....THE SUPREMACY CLAUSE REALLY IS IN 2012.

     
Welcome!
|
Not you?||
LogoutMy Dashboard

Happening Now...

 
Submit a calendar event