5 votes

Could Gary Johnson end The War On Drugs without the support of Congress?

Could Gary Johnson end the War on Drugs? Some say that he would not have the backing of Congress so he would not be able to effect change. This is how Gary Johnson could end The War On Drugs even if Congress does not support him in this endeavor.

As President, Gary Johnson would have the power of the Bully Pulpit to set the tone for change and refuse to sign new laws that further the oppression and discrimination of the War on Drugs. Gary Johnson could also make appointments to many offices that could use their position to change drug policy and the enforcement of drug laws:

Department of Justice:
Attorney General
Deputy Attorney General
Associate Attorney General
Administrator - Drug Enforcement Administration
Deputy Administrator - Drug Enforcement Administration
Director - Federal Bureau of Investigation

Office of National Drug Control Policy:
Director - "Drug Czar"
Deputy Director - Demand Reduction
Deputy Director - State and Local Affairs
Deputy Director - Supply Reduction

Department of Health and Human Services:
Commissioner of Food and Drugs
Director - National Institutes of Health
Administrator — Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

The President appoints the Attorney General and the Attorney General is accountable to the President. The Attorney General can change the classification of Marijuana from Schedule I to any other schedule that he chooses so that it can be considered to have medicinal value and immediately put a stop to the Federal Raids on Medical Marijuana Clinics in states that have Medical Marijuana Laws.

Here is an excerpt from The Controlled Substance Act where the Attorney General’s authority to reclassify or remove drugs is defined:
____________________________

Section 811. Authority and Criteria for Classification of Substances

(a) Rules and regulations of Attorney General; hearing

The Attorney General shall apply the provisions of this subchapter to the controlled substances listed in the schedules established by section 812 of this title and to any other drug or other substance added to such schedules under this subchapter. Except as provided in subsections (d) and (e) of this section, the Attorney General may by rule–

(1) add to such a schedule or transfer between such schedules any drug or other substance if he–

(A) finds that such drug or other substance has a potential for abuse, and

(B) makes with respect to such drug or other substance the findings prescribed by subsection (b) of section 812 of this title for the schedule in which such drug is to be placed; or

(2) remove any drug or other substance from the schedules if he finds that the drug or other substance does not meet the requirements for inclusion in any schedule.
____________________________

The Attorney General can reclassify, the DEA and FBI can change their priorities and use their resources elsewhere, the DOJ can prosecute real criminals, and the FDA and NIH can allow unbiased studies on Medical Marijuana.

Gary Johnson would be able to effectively end the Federal War on Drugs if he were President of the United States! Yes he can!
____________________________

Sources:
Controlled Substance Act: http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/21usc/811.htm
Presidential Appointments: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_positions_filled_by_pre...

Image to accompany this article: http://imgur.com/YJa8X

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

to answer your title!

no he can not end the war on drugs at all because he can not win...i wish he could

Gitmo Gary will never be President

So no.

“It is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that those who live after may have clean earth to till." -J.R.R. Tolkien

Yes he could.

He is the commander and chief. He could pull any military out of any situation in any country he would want to that are there for drug control and enforcement. He could order any law enforcement department to not arrest anyone for drugs. Similar to what Obamba has done with ICE and immigration.

It's time! Rand Paul 2016!

"Truth, Justice, and the American Way!"

Theoretically; Yes he could!

My reasoning is hypothetical; past presidents have used “Executive Orders” to create many laws in this land. It’s always been used to destroys or take away much of our freedom and liberty. It has also been used to give the Executive Branch more powers.

An executive order becomes law (as I understand it) only if congress does not challenge the “Presidential Order” within thirty days of being announced. If they don't it becomes Law!

Therefore Gary Johnson could create and executive order making certain drugs, now illegal, legal by executive order.

Congress would have thirty days to reverse his executive order. He could also theoretically create as many additional executive orders to un-due as many of the “unconstitutional laws” passed by congress during this past decade as well.

I was always hoping Ron Paul, if elected would have the courage to reverse many of these “unconstitutional laws” using “Executive Orders”, powers granted by congress during Roosevelt’s presidency, to him and future presidents.

But my fear has always been that Ron Paul would NOT do so out of principle, because he believes Executive Orders are NOT constitutional.

However, I do believe Gary Johnson would, and I would totally support his actions if he did. We must learn to fight fire with fire!

The Winds of Change!

wolfe's picture

He couldn't even do it WITH congress support.

The War On Drugs has been made law through various treaties. As I have said many times, all of these treaties would have to be revoked before the war on drugs will end. That's a fact.

So no, it has become a monumental, semi-impossible task.

The Philosophy Of Liberty -
http://www.thephilosophyofliberty.com/

Treaties repugnant to the Const are not law

Treaties repugnant to the Constitution are not law, they are null and void.

The key phrase in article six

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The president says he cannot under his oath to support and defend the constitution enforce such treaties, laws, or regulations.

No where in the constitution does it say that the Supreme court interpretes the constitutionality of any law.

Yhis idea is just a presumption started by John Marshall one of the RATifactionists ( so called Federalists) really the supporter of the one supreme nation not a federation of independent states.

He thinks he could, but no, I

He thinks he could, but no, I don't think he could. He'd need a majority from Congress. Or, he could sneak by getting a few libertarian judges on board to overturn gonzales vs. raich.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

issue a Presidential Finding

Presidential Finding gonzales vs. raich is repugnant to the constitution and is null and void. And so on for many laws, regulations, court findings.

The president then orders his Solicitor General and Attorney General to not defend any constitutional court cases to any challenge.

Force the proponents of all these actions that are repugnant to the constitution to privately fund and defend them.

Now Gary Johnson will never be president and if a miracle was to come to pass and he did become president from his actions he would not have the necessary principles or conviction to do what I have suggested.

My daydream was so good though.

Did you?

Did you even read the article Dr. NO?

Anonymous Libertarians
fb.com/AnonymousLibertarians