Why did the Supreme Court deny a challenge to Colorado's pot laws?
A bid by the states of Nebraska and Oklahoma to have Colorado鈥檚 recreational marijuana laws declared unconstitutional stalled Monday, when the Supreme Court declined to hear the legal challenge brought by Colorado鈥檚 neighbors.
The 6-to-2 decision means the court won't hear聽Nebraska and Oklahoma鈥檚 complaint, but the states聽could still bring the matter聽to lower courts.
Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito were the lone dissenters in the ruling, writing that the Court聽鈥�.鈥� A majority opinion was not released.
Before deciding whether to accept Nebraska and Oklahoma鈥檚 filing, the Supreme Court asked US Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, Jr. to examine the suit and recommend a course of action. In an opinion released in December, , saying that taking on the case as proposed 鈥渨ould represent a substantial and unwarranted expansion of this Court鈥檚 original jurisdiction,鈥� and that Nebraska and Oklahoma鈥檚 complaint should be denied.
Original jurisdiction refers to the right of a court to hear a case first, rather than through appellate jurisdiction in which a high court rules on lower courts' decisions. Original jurisdiction has been invoked sparingly in the US judicial system, usually to settle interstate territorial or resource disputes.
In January, Nebraska and Oklahoma to their 2014 lawsuit with the high court in which they responded to Mr. Verrilli鈥檚 assessment and argued that the 鈥渟prawling $100-million-per-month marijuana growing, processing, and retailing organization鈥� authorized by Colorado voters in 2012 conflicts with the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), and that the Colorado marijuana industry was causing harm in its neighboring states.
The states鈥� lawyers brief argued that 鈥淐olorado鈥檚 actions have directly caused Nebraska鈥檚 and Oklahoma鈥檚 harms,鈥� and that the Centennial State should be held responsible for the damage its marijuana inflicts on its neighbors in the same way that bartenders would be 鈥渉eld responsible for the drunk who kills a family with his car鈥� after knowingly selling the drunk 鈥渢en beers in two hours.鈥�
In , the state acknowledged the $700-million marijuana industry (half of it in medical marijuana) but said that Nebraska and Oklahoma鈥檚 methods of challenging the trade were a 鈥渄angerous use鈥� of the Supreme Court鈥檚 original jurisdiction and of the Supremacy Clause that establishes state laws as subordinate to the US Constitution and federal laws.
While recreational marijuana use and sale remains illegal federally, the Department of Justice had stated that while interstate marijuana trafficking would remain an investigative priority, the department would effectively defer to states with legalized marijuana to regulate the drug.听
The Colorado response went on to argue that the state鈥檚 marijuana regulatory system does not violate other states鈥� sovereign rights, a qualification for the invocation of original jurisdiction, and that the subject of the suit would have been better suited for debate in lower courts and a traditional appeals process.
Colorado remains one of four US states where the recreational marijuana trade is legal, joined by Oregon, Washington state, and Alaska. Voters in the District of Columbia legalized the possession and use of marijuana, but Congress intervened to block its sale and taxation in the federal district.
At least 10 states are considering some form of legalization of marijuana in 2016, .听
