Answer:
It is still illegal to use or possess marijuana under Texas law — and has been since 1931.
Explanation:
What changed last year is that hemp is considered different from marijuana. Since the law change, prosecutors and state crime labs have dropped hundreds of pending marijuana charges and declined to pursue new ones because they don’t have the resources to detect a substance’s precise THC content, arguably keeping them from the evidence they need to prove in court if a cannabis substance is illegal.
Gov. Greg Abbott and other state officials insisted that the bill didn’t decriminalize marijuana and that the prosecutors don’t understand the new law. Still, marijuana prosecutions in Texas plummeted by more than half in the six months after the law was enacted, according to the data from the Texas Office of Court Administration.
And medical cannabis is legal in Texas in very limited circumstances. Abbott signed the Texas Compassionate Use Act into law in 2015, allowing people with epilepsy to access cannabis oil with less than 0.5% THC. Last year, he signed House Bill 3703, which expanded the list of qualifying conditions to include diseases such as multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease and Lou Gehrig's disease, or ALS.
Answer:
The Commerce Clause (Art. I, §8, cl. 3) of the United States Constitution provides that the Congress shall have the power to regulate interstate and foreign commerce. The plain meaning of this language might indicate a limited power to regulate commercial trade between persons in one state and persons outside of that state.
Explanation:
The factor should a plaintiff consider when deciding which interference tort applies to a situation is that
- The plaintiff must a contract that is with a third party;
- The defendant must know about the contract at the time of the alleged interference
- The defendant must have interfered intentionallly and the interference was not right
- The actions of defendant’s led to a breach of the contract
- The plaintiff has suffered some measure of damage as a result
- The defendant knew a contract between the plaintiff and a third party existed.
For better understanding let's explain what tort interference means
- There are two types of tortious interference
- Tortious interference with contract
- Tortious interference with good economic advantage.
- Tort interference is regarded as an issue where one party was involved in something or does a thing to intentionally disregard another party’s business transactions or project
From the above we can therefore say that the answer the factors should a plaintiff consider when deciding which interference tort applies to a situation is that:
- The plaintiff must a contract that is with a third party;
- The defendant must know about the contract at the time of the alleged interference
- The defendant must have interfered intentionallly and the interference was not right
- The actions of defendant’s led to a breach of the contract
- The plaintiff has suffered some measure of damage as a result
- The defendant knew a contract between the plaintiff and a third party existed is correct
Learn more Tort interference from:
brainly.com/question/15058912
