Before anyone answers "the Commerce clause" (which is technically the mechanism through which most federal drug regulation springs...more on that later), keep in mind our predecessors had to pass the 18th Amendment to prohibit the manufacture, transportation, and sale of alcoholic beverages nationally...AND THEN pass the 23rd Amendment to repeal Prohibition.
The Commerce Clause is undoubtedly one of the, if not THE, most abused and twisted legal vehicle when it comes to federal overreach. People who correctly cherish the Rule of Law rightly rail against such abuse, while statists and Dems/libs LOVE it.
Furthermore, if someone's WANTED to regulate what you eat via federal legislation (again..a power not found in the Constitution) I can promise you, it's be through the CC.
Therefore, if anyone supports federal regulation of cannibus without a Constitutional Amendment vis-à-vis the Commerce Clause, the rightful response is "Et tu, Brute?" Congratulations...you are a philosophical cousin of Nancy Pelosi, Hillary, Obama, the New Deal, the left wing of SCOTUS, Obamacare-lovers, and pretty much every two-bit left wing/Dem since the 1930s who tried to regulate away the right to keep and bear arms.
...and I hope you LOVE tofu.
‘Therefore, if anyone supports federal regulation of cannibus without a Constitutional Amendment vis-à-vis the Commerce Clause, the rightful response is “Et tu, Brute?”’
By that train of thought there should be vending machine on every street corner selling not only pot but Heroin, Opium, Fentanyl and whatever else you want to push. The government’s no.1 job is to protect the general population. That the are not really doing a good job of that remains to be seen. Trying to make sure we don’t become a nation of deadheads is part of that job.
See that? Now you’re a pusher. Because your train of thought regarding personal freedom runs counter to the prohibitionists who believe that the scourge of drugs justifies a police state to save people from them.