[ctdonath2]

Raich was the DEA vs. a terminally ill grandmother. Montana (a full state, not a poor dying individual) should be able to shove the issue back up to SCOTUS, and make it clear the ruling was absurd (being based on the notion that reducing demand in an illegal interstate market somehow fits the Commerce Clause), especially in light of "shall not be infringed" overriding any bent interpretations of the Commerce Clause.

[An.American.Expatriate]

This is the part of Raich that is scary .... "Not only is it impossible to distinguish 'controlled substances manufactured and distributed intrastate' from 'controlled substances manufactured and distributed interstate' but it hardly makes sense to speak in such terms," Antonin Gregory Scalia

at the time, I made the follwing comment:

"As the court explains, tomatoes which are grown at home and possessed for personal use are never more than an instant from the interstate market and this is so whether or not the possession is for nutritional use or lawful use under the laws of a particular state."

I simply substituted tomotoes for marijuana.

I can EASILY see this being used to stike down that law.

Further - it was not the State of California which was sued by the feds - it was an individual. This will be the case again here.