A bill to decriminalize and deschedule cannabis, to provide for reinvestment in certain persons adversely impacted by the War on Drugs, to provide for expungement of certain cannabis offenses, and for other purposes.

The bill's core purpose—decriminalizing and descheduling cannabis—falls within Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce under Article I, Section 8, Clause 3, as the Supreme Court has long held that Congress may prohibit or regulate articles in interstate commerce. However, the provisions for reinvestment and expungement raise concerns under the Spending Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 1) and the Tenth Amendment. Congress may attach conditions to federal funds to achieve general welfare, but such conditions must be unambiguous and related to the federal interest. The expungement of…

This bill, while appearing to restore liberty by removing federal prohibition of cannabis, still operates under the assumption that the federal government possesses the authority to regulate or decriminalize such matters. The Constitution grants no enumerated power over the cultivation, sale, or use of cannabis; such authority is reserved to the states under the Tenth Amendment. The reinvestment and expungement provisions further entangle the federal government in areas properly left to the states and the people. I would condition my approval on a clear recognition that the federal government …

This bill, insofar as it seeks to decriminalize and deschedule cannabis at the federal level, is consistent with the limited nature of enumerated powers, as the Constitution grants no general police power to the United States. However, the provisions for reinvestment and expungement must be carefully confined to matters within Congress's spending and judicial powers, respectively, and must not encroach upon the reserved powers of the states under the Tenth Amendment. The descheduling of cannabis recognizes that the original federal prohibition likely exceeded the commerce power as originally u…

The Constitution vests in Congress the power to regulate commerce among the several states. Under the broad interpretation of that power in Gibbons v. Ogden, the authority to regulate includes the authority to decide the extent of regulation, including the choice to remove federal penalties for a substance that is an article of commerce. The Necessary and Proper Clause, as expounded in McCulloch v. Maryland, further supports Congress's discretion to select the means for executing its enumerated powers, so long as the end is legitimate. Here, the bill's decriminalization and descheduling of can…