This might surprise those who believe that Idaho needs to repeal its law prohibiting transport through Idaho of hemp containing trace amounts of THC: repeal is not necessary. Here's why: The U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, paragraph 3, reserves to the United States Congress the authority "To regulate Commerce ... among the several States." And Congress has not delegated that power to Idaho, or to any other state.

There was a serious problem with the Articles of Confederation, and it became apparent quickly, as every one of the 13 original states imposed tariffs on trade with each of its neighbors. The United States was formed, in essence, partly to establish a free trade zone within the national borders, and no state is allowed to regulate interstate trade.

This means that the trucker and trucking company that was moving hemp from outside of Idaho to another state (not Idaho) was doing so under the mantle of protection of the United States Constitution, and the interruption of that transport was a violation of the US Constitution.

In other words, the police, prosecutors, and Idaho law are ALL in violation of the US Constitution, and the only thing that needs to be done to rectify that situation is for them to stop enforcing the Idaho law. The law itself was never legal to begin with — it was established well after Idaho became a state, by which action the US Constitution was explicitly accepted as the law of the land even within Idaho borders — and thus it is null and void.

That means the police and prosecutors have been acting in violation of national law from the beginning of this case.

Stop hiding behind a law that should never have been passed in the first place, and is legally and constitutionally null and void. Let citizens of other states trade with each other, EVEN if that means goods must be transported across Idaho. And even when those goods are not welcome IN Idaho.

Dan Karlan,

Pocatello