Current debates about legalization of marijuana highlight some of the tensions between state and federal power and authority. After reading the three cases below, how do you make sense of the line between powers/authority properly exercised by the Federal government and that exercised by the States? In other words, how are the Courts' decisions in these three cases similar and/or different with respect to their reasoning? As part of your answer, please indicate which clauses, articles, amendments of the US Constitution come into play. You might also address the following questions:

1. What modes of interpretation is the Court using in the three decisions?
2. What function of the Constitution does each case represent (as per the Preamble)?
3. Who are "we the people" according to the Supreme Court?
4. Reflect on what it means for states and/or the federal government to have the authority/power over various areas of law/issues. What kind of impact on the political life of the nation does it have if the states have unfettered power over issues within their boundaries? If the federal government has that power?

Cases:

• McCulloch v. Maryland4 Wheat. 316 (1819)
• Barron v. Baltimore7 Pet. 243 (1833)
• Gonzales v. Raich545 US 1 (2005)