I think he was saying that it would be impossible to distinguish illegal use of marijuana from illegal use, because anyone can claim it's for a medical condition. That's particularly true given that in Doe vs Bolton, the court held that "health reasons" for having a late-term abortion can include virtually anything, including alleged psychological health.
The other aspect to that point is that while the legislature can come up with various criteria to distinguish legal from illegal uses, or legal from illegal types, or whatever, that's not the job of the court.
Well, that would justify banning booze.
I think he was saying that it would be impossible to distinguish illegal use of marijuana from illegal use, because anyone can claim it's for a medical condition.
No, the state requires a doctor's presecription.
Scalia succumbed. And then rationalized. It's that simple. He has an activist streak.