Was just reading Rehnquist's opinion in Lopez (at 3:18 am!), and found the above quote. Do you think there is any chance in hell that a court will ever undo some if not all of the commerce clause expansion described by Rehnquist in Lopez? It almost seems like the medical pot case would be a good opportunity to do it, if they wanted to. And if Scalia believes, as he says he does, that the gubmint should leave it to the states to decide on ABORTION, which clearly skirts very closely with the most grave issue of all, then why would he not also seek to return such a regulatory power as weed-growing to the states?
I don't think so, at least not in the near future. From what I've gathered, Thomas is the only Justice who seems genuinely interested in actually shrinking the expanded commerce clause. Rehnquist has been content to stop the expansion without actually turning anything back, and I don't think that Scalia has objected to that stance.
then why would [Scalia] not also seek to return such a regulatory power as weed-growing to the states?
Because the Bush administration is asking him not to. And that request carries a lot of weight, imo.
On the bright side, when it comes to predicting what the Court's going to do, I'm quite often way off base.