Yes, but federal law is hardly imposed when it contradicts state law. Practicality and theory are two different beasts entirely.

That guy in the marijuana case only got pursued due to the quantity, nothing else.

For every random case like that, there's millions who are smoking weed all over the USA every day and won't be prosecuted.

This is basically one parent saying you can go to a party with rules in place (state) , but then if you take the piss the other parent plays bad cop (feds) and punish you accordingly.

No feds are coming to you over a few joints so essentially in practice the state has control. Only when a member of that state takes the piss and abuses it do the feds get involved.

The original point was whether states had control. In practice they do. Most people do not have to worry about the feds coming.

You cannot take fringe outlier cases like that and claim they are the norm. They are not. That guy had a marijuana farm. The feds busted his ass as they had reason to believe he was dealing, not falling within the remit of state law.

This guy took the piss. Let's be honest here.

Not to mention, states can nullify some federal laws. The precedent for that was set in 1992 in a dispute vs the state of New York and the USA.

The simple fact is that its not as simple as the other post made it out to be to push his political agenda.