[tpaine]

Participants in an unconstitutional federal program to control the amount of wheat in the market were coerced to produce a certain amount.

In return, the federal government unconstitutionally enticed them by paying them a higher price per bushel out of public funds.

A farmer, - choosing to opt out, who produced more than his allotted share in order to provide for his personal use, obviously will not buy that additional amount in the market. Multiplied that by a few million farmers and it would have a substantial affect on the gov't scheme to control the market.. --
-- An interstate commerce that Congress was unconstitutionally regulating.

[Zon]

-- An interstate commerce that Congress was unconstitutionally regulating.

Correct. To elaborate...

The Commerce Clause grants Congress the power to regulate commerce that occurs "among the several States," which we have seen meant "between state and state" or between persons in one state and persons in another. It does not speak of a power to regulate commerce that "concerns" more than one state, or even commerce between persons of the same state that somehow "concerns" other states. By the same token, the Commerce Clause also empowers Congress to regulate commerce "with foreign Nations, . . . and with the Indian Tribes."¹⁷⁹ It does not empower Congress to regulate commerce that concerns or affects foreign nations or that concerns or affects Indian tribes¹⁸⁰.102RP6

[Zon]

Short and eye-opening read that you may be interested in.

How stare decisis Subverts the Law: 

...It is difficult to estimate how many unconstitutional legislative provisions are adopted each year by Congress, but a plausible number is more than 20,000, or about as many as the number of bills introduced each year. There is simply no way that the federal courts can handle all the cases that might arise under that many provisions. They are almost forced to rely on the presumption of constitutionality of statutes, but members of Congress are increasingly reluctant to restrain themselves from adopting legislation they know to be unconstitutional, but which is supported by some of their constituents, and passing the duty to the federal courts of striking legislation that should never have been passed in the first place.