Question

We have several different tiers or jurisdictions for law. We have local laws (city and county), state laws, and federal (national) laws. As individuals, should we be allowed to only recognize the ones with which we agree? Should we have to abide by all of the laws? Should the different tiers be allowed to pick and choose which to follow or enforce and which to ignore? Please provide your thoughts as this relates to modern issues like sanctuary cities, Colorado's marijuana laws, Hobby Lobby's refusal to follow the Affordable Healthcare law as it pertains to certain requirements. You may talk about other examples of these conflicts as well.

Answer 1

I believe laws shoud be graded and given preferences accoring to persons location.

National laws should apply to everyone in America, So, those living in a particular state, nationlal and state laws should apply while for those in cities and counties, national,. state as well as local laws should apply.If there is a conflict between what is prescribed in a national law, state law and city law, the city law should apply to people first as that is the persons immediate group.The courts could confirm validity of the local law in preference to the other national one that conflicts with it.

For example:-

1. US and canada have the concept of samctuary cities.Sanctuary citys a city that limits its cooperation with the national government effort to enforce immigration law.
2. Use and possession Cannabis is legal in Colorado, although it inst legal in America. The Colorado Amendment 64, was passed by voters on November 6, 2012, led to legalization in January 2014.This local law takes preference over national law making cannabis as illegal in America.

3. Similar is the case with Hobby Lobby's refusal to follow the Affordable Healthcare law that was implemented as per Obamacare.
Hobby Lobby's Christian owners and others like them are now free, on religiolus grounds, to remove four controversial contraception methods from insurance plans provided to their staff