I would think out of respect for the Constitution, you would at least satisfy yourself that a fedgov policy does not violate it before you lend your support.
The same expansive Commerce Clause that authorizes feds to regulate intrastate drug policies, also authorizes feds to control health care, education and the environment. Without it, we wouldn't have Obamacare bearing down on us right now.
So do you endorse the expansive Commerce Clause as being consistent with its original meaning? Yes or No.
“So do you endorse the expansive Commerce Clause as being consistent with its original meaning? Yes or No.”
Didn’t I already answer this question, albeit, not with your desired binary selection, but I’m pretty sure I answered it anyway.
Are you for legalizing heroin as “commerce” if a state says it should be legal there? Should beer be harder to get than heroin for a teenager that wants it? Should marijuana be cheaper than a bottle of liquor?