Well, I don't think the original poster's idea has much legal merit, but I think a few people misunderstood what he was saying (or maybe I'm musunderstanding it).

I don't think he was saying the 18th ammendment applied to weed or that the 21st made weed legal by "analogy." I think he was saying that it required a constitutional ammendment to authorize the laws to make liquor illegal, so it should require a similar constitutional amendment to make weed illegal. He's saying federal laws prohibiting marijuana are not constitutional without an ammendment to authorize them, just as the Volstead Act prohibiting alcohol apparently would not have been legal without the 18th amendment to authorize it.

Anyway, that's how I understood it.
dragonrider Reviewed by dragonrider on . Break this defense for me. I have what I think is a bulletproof defense against federal marijuana charges which I believe any judge or jury who gives two cents about the constitution of the United States would be forced to agree with. The eighteenth amendment was ratified in order to outlaw alcohol in the United States. If it could have been legally accomplished by Congress there would have been no amendment for this. The Twenty-First Amendment repealed this amendment, and expressly gave the power to regulate alcohol Rating: 5