Travis Vandenbrul found a conflict in the RAD initiative with the US Constitution.
When I wrote the RAD initiative I thought I would be morally wrong for the state of Arizona to extradite people who were wanted in other states for victimless marijuana crimes, so I put this blurb in the RAD initiatives.
The government shall not extradite a person to another state or country if the person could be charged with marijuana crimes which would be legal in Arizona.Article IV, Section II, Clause 2 of the US Constitution seems to say that if a person is wanted in another state for a crime, that Arizona must extradite them. It says:
... A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime ...I don't think this affects the "constitutionality" of the RAD initiative, because after all the RAD initiative modifies the Arizona Constitution. So if it is passed, by definition the RAD initiative would be "constitutional". Article VI of the US Constitution which says:
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 notwithstandingI think that Article VI of the US Constitution would allow the Article IV, Section II, Clause 2 of the US Constitution to take precedence over the RAD clause in the Arizona Constitution. I did find one article which said the US Supreme Court has addressed the issue and said that if a state refuses to extradite a person to another state, then the state wanting the person extradited could have the Federal government do the extradition.
The Supreme Court of the United States has held that the Extradition Clause applies to felonies, misdemeanors and even to petty offenses. It has further held that in the event a state chooses not to surrender a wanted individual, a federal court may order such surrender to the demanding state, pursuant to the Extradition Clause.I believe the US had a similar problem back in the days of slavery when a slave escaped from a slave state to a free state. I don't know how it was addressed then. I would be interested to hear comments on this so that it can be addressed in future RAD initiatives. Here is a link to the RAD initiative to legalize marijuana along with the text of the initiative:
1. The government shall recognize that marijuana abuse is NOT a criminal problem but a medical problem.Here is a link to the RAD initiative which legalizes all drugs. It's identical to the RAD marijuana initiative, with the exception that marijuana is changed to all drugs.
Tom Bailey has an interesting comment on this. I'm curious about the 14th Amendment part. A number of legal experts say that per the 10th Amendment, the Federal "War on Drugs" is unconstitutional. Here is Tom's comment:
Tom Bailey An unconstitutional law has no authority. Marijuana prohibition is a bill of attainder. Congress is denied any authority to enact a bill of attainder by Article I Section 19 of the Constitution. The fourteenth amendment extended constitutional protections onto the states. Extraditing a person to face prosecution on an unconstitutional charge is not required.