The USSC's "interpretation" of the Commerce Clause hasn't relied on stare decisis. I like Justice Thomas' opinion in Lopez, from around 1995 I think, that points out that the first 150 years of the court's decisions regarding the Commerce Clause changed completely 50 years ago, around 1935. Judge Alito mentioned this change during the hearings. Another Justice, Breyer I think it was, called Thomas' views "revisionist".
i was under the impression it had been used as a guiding point (i.e. follow the constitution, and see who previous judges did the same, this is back when judges were intellectualy honest).
Stare Decisis isn't evil or anti-constitutional unless its used that way, a judge in the future may look to Thomas and Scalia for more information on how they handled a similiar decision in a case before them, and use that for assistance, plus also so as to keep the law consistant and predictable (and not accidently over rule something else, without realizing it).
Scalia occasionally will note that congress accidently and/or unintentionally repealed laws unrelated to a new law by language used in certain bills.
I.E. sloppy legislative writing.