Even if the flight is between two cities where pot is 100% legal, it can always be diverted, and you might end up landing in Kansas City.
The law enforcement you might run into on a flight would be an Air Marshal, and they are Federal agents, not local PD or State, so they would be enforcing Federal laws.
There was a full-fledged constitutional crisis over it in 1832 when South Carolina issued an ordinance declaring the Jackson administration's tarrifs unconstitutional [2].
The similiarities between the Jackson and Trump administration continue to astound. And Jackson ended up on the 20.
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nullification_(U.S._Constitu...
> Between 1798 and the beginning of the Civil War in 1861, several states threatened or attempted nullification of various federal laws. None of these efforts were legally upheld. The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions were rejected by the other states. The Supreme Court rejected nullification attempts in a series of decisions in the 19th century, including Ableman v. Booth, which rejected Wisconsin's attempt to nullify the Fugitive Slave Act. The Civil War ended most nullification efforts.
> In the 1950s, southern states attempted to use nullification and interposition to prevent integration of their schools. These attempts failed when the Supreme Court again rejected nullification in Cooper v. Aaron, explicitly holding that the states may not nullify federal law.
I wouldn't say they absolutely can since every attempt to do this so far has failed in the courts. It seems like a pretty flimsy theory since the Constitution explicitly says otherwise.
I suppose this rules out cannabis drone deliveries too :)
However, here in the United States the TSA and cops have shown that they have no problem enforcing the laws against passengers who became criminals due circumstances outside their control.
There was an interesting case where a guy was on a flight from Utah to Pennsylvania with a gun. He was transporting it exactly the way you're supposed to when flying (declared at check-in, unloaded in a locked container, non-TSA approved locks) when his flight got diverted to New Jersey. Due to an airline mixup, he had to get his luggage and re-check it before getting on a later flight to his final destination. However by taking possession of his suitcase without applying for a New Jersey gun license he was committing a felony. After he went to check his bag and declared that it contained a firearm, the TSA called the port authority and he got arrested. Normally when people in NY/NJ get arrested for trying to check a firearm at the airport they take a plea deal but this guy ended up spending some time in jail (although the prosecutor let the case go after four months).
This doesn't change the insanity of this story much, except that if you're going to fly with a firearm, you should probably check the gun laws in the states where you're planning to have layovers.
Lastly, the guy spent only a few days in jail before making bail (still crazy to spend any time whatsoever), and it took years for him to get his gun/ammo back.
He left the airport and stayed in a hotel overnight.
>They argued, among other things, that probable cause existed for the arrest because § 926A was inapplicable, given Revell's overnight stay in New Jersey
Instead they could look for dangerous things in your carry ons, but that's boring.
If the flight goes as planned, the person (and their weed) never left California.
i.e. 99.999% percent of the time, they're not breaking the law.
NOT THAT I'M SCARRED BY ANY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE...
That said, sure, LA <-> SF is a quite safe route. California <-> Colorado is a far riskier bet.