Drug use/abuse isn't the same as the RKBA.
>>>>Do you think the interstate commerce clause of the Constitution authorizes federal laws against narcotics and firearms?
Narcotics = Yes.
Firearms = NO!
The Controlled Substances Act of 1970 is the law of the land. The 1991 SCOTUS decision in Touby v USA was unanimous and upheld the CSA.
Congress can legislate under the Commerce Clause. The ONLY issue was one of delegation, can Congress delegate it's legislative authority to an executive-branch agency. Again, under fairly settled law, Congress can so long as it limits the discretion of the agency and provides the overall structure/guidance to the agency in the grant of delegation, and so long as the agency follows established principles of administrative law (due process, review and comment, etc).
SCOTUS has repeatedly upheld Row v Wade. What's your point?
A dubious claim at best since plaintiffs didn't challenge the constitutionality of the CSA as a whole.
In your opinion, is the "substantial effects" test consistent with the original intent of the Commerce Clause?