Recently, several states have taken steps toward expanding their marijuana markets by removing restrictions on out of state investors, a move that will serve to further nullify federal prohibition in effect.

According to the LA Times, the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board amended its rule to allow out-of-state investors to finance recreational marijuana businesses. Prior to the change, a six month residency was required. Oregon has passed a similar rule as well, while Colorado is looking at eliminating its two-year residency requirement.

The Associated Press reports how difficult it can be for some marijuana businesses to flourish due to federal banking laws.

The head of the Colorado Cannabis Chamber of Commerce was more blunt.

“We can’t go get a loan from the bank to grow our business to help us accelerate, despite the fact that most secured loans are popular for debt consolidation.” Tyler Henson said. “We are susceptible to falling behind other states.” 

Allowing people from other states to invest in marijuana businesses will open the door for more capital to flow into the industry. Opening up the business to more investors means the industry will grow as more money enters the market. The more the industry grows the more money flows to state coffers.

In Washington marijuana tax revenue is expected to reach $362 million by the fiscal year 2019.

While some might see be less than thrilled at the idea of states collecting more taxes, the silver lining is that it provides them with financial resources in case the feds decide to withhold money they use to effectively bribe states into enforcing unconstitutional federal laws. In turn, this means the states will be even more determine to protect state revenue from federal intervention.

This will further cement nullification of the federal prohibition on marijuana into place.

One of the best means to nullify unconstitutional federal laws is by letting the market make it unenforceable. We’ve seen how nullification works in the states that have legalized marijuana, and it’s even more effective when states put in place proper incentives to allow the industry to thrive and grow. The federal government has essentially conceded the battle over marijuana prohibition in states where it has been legalized as long as the industry is properly regulated.


State legalization partially removes one layer of law prohibiting the possession and use of marijuana, but federal prohibition would remain in place.

Of course, the federal government lacks any constitutional authority to ban or regulate marijuana within the borders of a state, despite the opinion of the politically connected lawyers on the Supreme Court. If you doubt this, ask yourself why it took a constitutional amendment to institute federal alcohol prohibition.

Whilse state actions donot alter federal law, they take a step toward nullifying in effect the federal ban. FBI statistics show that law enforcement makes approximately 99 of 100 marijuana arrests under state, not federal law. Easing the state laws removes some of the basis for 99 percent of marijuana arrests.

Furthermore, figures indicate it would take 40 percent of the DEA’s yearly-budget just to investigate and raid all of the dispensaries in Los Angeles – a single city in a single state. That doesn’t include the cost of prosecution. The lesson? The feds lack the resources to enforce marijuana prohibition without state assistance.

With nearly half the country legalizing marijuana, the feds find themselves in a position where they simply can’t enforce prohibition any more. The feds need state cooperation to fight the “drug war,” and that has rapidly evaporated in the last few years with state legalization, practically nullifying the ban.

“The lesson here is pretty straight forward. When enough people say, ‘No!’ to the federal government, and enough states pass laws backing those people up, there’s not much the feds can do to shove their so-called laws, regulations or mandates down our throats,” Tenth Amendment Center founder and executive director Michael Boldin said.

TJ Martinell

The 10th Amendment

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”



Featured Articles

On the Constitution, history, the founders, and analysis of current events.

featured articles


Tenther Blog and News

Nullification news, quick takes, history, interviews, podcasts and much more.

tenther blog


State of the Nullification Movement

232 pages. History, constitutionality, and application today.

get the report


Path to Liberty

Our flagship podcast. Michael Boldin on the constitution, history, and strategy for liberty today

path to liberty


Maharrey Minute

The title says it all. Mike Maharrey with a 1 minute take on issues under a 10th Amendment lens. maharrey minute

Tenther Essentials

2-4 minute videos on key Constitutional issues - history, and application today


Join TAC, Support Liberty!

Nothing helps us get the job done more than the financial support of our members, from just $2/month!



The 10th Amendment

History, meaning, and purpose - the "Foundation of the Constitution."

10th Amendment



Get an overview of the principles, background, and application in history - and today.