Under the overarching “Necessary & Proper” Clause [Art I. sec. 8 Cl.17] in Gonzales v. Raich, the Supreme Court ruled that that Congress could regulate the personal use of marijuana for medical use (cancer and serious illness) even under physician prescription and explicitly sanctioned by state law in order to secure a broad federal social purpose.
The federal law pre-empted the state law for this reason. This case allows for federal regulation of private and personal choices in one’s control of health.
I am not saying that Lopez v. US will not present an obstacle. But in Lopez, it was clearly not commerce related. It dealt with “possession of handguns” near a local school.
Here they aren’t regulating ANY social conduct. The marijuana case is distinguishable because there they were actually engaging in SOMETHING. Here people are merely engaging in living as a U.S. Citizen. To my knowledge the government is relying on the Commerce Clause and Taxing power to accomplish their nefarious plot. Thus, I think Lopez and Bailey are more on point than Raich.