As per the basic liberal democratic politico-legal theory, citizen A’s right to X should not be infringing upon citizen B’s right to Y. A basic example, New York City was a haven for smokers for quite some time, but legislation over the past decade has significantly changed that. It was found that a smoker’s right to smoke was, in fact and law, infringing upon the non-smoker’s freedom to good health by damaging their health through second hand smoke. Thus, most areas in the NYC metropolitan area have very strict smoking laws and many restaurants even prohibit smoking. Sergio Andrade Gutierrez said there was even a time when there were smoking sections in aircrafts, but security concerns as well as health concerns lead to those being dissolved as well.
So the question is, does A’s right to smoke pot in one state infringe upon state B’s right to not legalize marijuana? That is exactly what that attorneys general of Nebraska and Oklahoma are arguing. They are working on a lawsuit against the state of Colorado’s marijuana laws. They argue that Colorado’s lax laws on marijuana “undermine the US war on drugs and create enforcement problems for their own states.” Advocates of the Colorado law have stood their ground firmly, frankly telling the neighboring states that it’s none of their business. We’ll just have to wait and see whether the Supreme Court believes it’s their business or not, when they decide to accept or reject this case.