Quote Originally Posted by senorx12562
As for the situation with alcohol, it is utterly inapposite, as no constitutional provision creates any right to obtain, possess, or consume alcohol, medicinally or otherwise. And if I'm not mistaken, the enshrinement (actually a term of art among those with a legal education, but I'm glad you find it amusing) of gambling in the Colorado constitution actually specifies the locales in which it is to be allowed, a type of specificity which I don't believe is present in Amendment 20. Correct me if I'm wrong.
First off, as you correctly guess, I'm not an attorney and very much over my head, but you're wrong about A20. It's specific. Where we disagree (I think) is on whether or not allowing localities to restrict or ban MMCs is a violation of a patient's right to acquire MMJ. I don't think it is, since the patient is free to pursue all other avenues. That's where the comparison with dry counties comes in: living in a dry county is not a significant bar to acquiring and enjoying alcohol.

There's middle ground as well; there are ways to ensure patient access without trampling local electorates. A few that come to mind: raising caregiver patient limits in brown counties, raising patient possession limits so rural or disabled patients would have to travel less frequently, providing an affirmative defense for MMJ delivery services. Another sensible restriction would be to allow the bans only by popular referendum and not by statute or ordinance, as we do for alcohol sales.