If you have an unjust law on the books, you can have all the due process you want while being arrested, tried, convicted, sentenced, and jailed, and that doesn't help you one whit.
Actually, that was exactly the case in the Eastern Block. All those laws for "crimes against the state" were on the book. Most of the GULAG prisoners were in fact jailed after a "due process".
And I think it's the same now with the US. Tons of laws that you can never be sure you are not breaking. Tons of laws that everyone is breaking (copyright law, anyone?) etc.
Every empire will collapse eventually. Under its own weight.
The laws were on the book, but the due process, as understood in the western societies, includes the presumption of innocence and proof of the crime.
For most victims of the GULAG, the charges were false, confessions obtained with force, and witness testimony made up. Essentially, if I don't like somebody, I just make an anonymous report to NKVD, and 99% chance is that they'll disappear. That doesn't sound like the due process we all know in the US...
You're missing the point. If the crime on the books is "criticizing the government," you can have all your procedural due process safeguards of presumption of innocence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt. But I'll still get you convicted and thrown in prison for the rest of your life, Gulag-style.
Again, folks: it's necessary to ensure that criminal laws on the books are just and reasonable (see malum prohibitum vs. malum in se) and that due process is followed when enforcing those laws. Due process when enforcing a law that's unjust leads to unjust results.
Ok... so what is unjust about a drug dealing prosecution?
Decriminalizing drug use is smart, but everywhere it is decriminalized, but the sale is considered illegal, prosecution for dealing is quite harsh.
Again, comparing an outlet to an economic problem with ideological repression or downright made up charges is very strange to me. No one is denying that there is an economic problem that is driving people to commit crimes. That needs to be addressed, and brutality is not the answer. But please, don't make this into a Stalin comparison.
The question is whether the federal law criminalizing the sale and possession (not just sale!) of certain pharmaceuticals is just, sensible, and constitutional.
If you have an unjust law on the books, you can have all the due process you want while being arrested, tried, convicted, sentenced, and jailed, and that doesn't help you one whit.