Ponder these names: Chris Christie and Rudy Giuliani.
Are these names more dangerous for the cannabis legalization movement than that of Donald Trump?
This is not just about cannabis, and that fact will likely keep the drug war dogs at bay in this case.
Opposing the states (and the public majority) on this “cannafront” opens up a serious “cannaworms” that likely forms a majorly painful distraction that the federal government does not want.
In short, this is about state power versus federal power — a legal battle that would apparently become terribly amplified and complex to put our nation at further risk of never-ending instability during already stressful times.
In a truly just American society, it would finally even open the door to the perfectly legitimate legal challenge against the Commerce Clause being repeatedly ruled by our Supreme Court as the rational interpretation of law that allows the Controlled Substances Act to even exist.
In other words, the whole war on (some) drugs could fall upon finally publicly recognizing that the Commerce Clause (i.e. “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes”) cannot rationally condone that war by any uncorrupted measure.
If Congress can regulate any activity having a substantial effect on commerce (which is the illegally judicially redefined version of the Commerce Clause for the past several decades after the New Deal), then Congress must (for legal consistency) be able to regulate your thought activity, which literally determines all of your buying and selling decisions (so obviously always has a rational effect on commerce).
Importantly note that the technology allowing remotely controlling the mind is already reasonably pressing these days and is apparently available for a fairly soon upcoming generation of Americans, so this is a critical issue in and of itself.
Compounding that drug war fall is the fact that there is no concrete (so credible) evidence proving literally even a slightly more “drug free” America has been achieved via prohibition, despite horrible degrees of destruction by prohibition at reasonably serious taxpayer expense.
The last thing ‘certain drug’ prohibitionists should want is to make a lot of noise, because that likely exacerbates their fall of power.
Their days are simply and thankfully numbered, while proponents for ending the failed drug war hypocrisy machine (run by drug prohibition addicts lying and in effect stealing to get their prohibition fix) continue to preferably maturely apply the public pressure needed to achieve that righteous end in favor of treating drug abuse as the health (not criminal) issue that it most sanely is — preferably (for public safety) while justly treating law abuse as the criminal issue that it most certainly is.
I'm an honest freak (or reasonably responsibly balanced "misfit", if you prefer) of an entertainer working and resting as my careful contribution to help improve society. Too many people abuse reasoning (e.g. 'partial truth = whole truth' scam), while I exercise reason to explore and express whole truth without any conflict-of-interest.