[bornred]

But wheat was a legal item already. If somebody starts growing and smoking dope the day after Prop 19 passes, the net impact to commerce is zero. He didn't buy it last week and he isn't buying it this week.

Of course there's no guarantee that any of this will fly, but it would be good to have the libs fighting commerce clause overreach for once. And getting high is way too near and dear to their hearts for them to just drop the matter - this one is personal.

[moehoward]

"But wheat was a legal item already. If somebody starts growing and smoking dope the day after Prop 19 passes, the net impact to commerce is zero. He didn't buy it last week and he isn't buying it this week."

The net impact to existing commerce would be zero. It certainly would impact future. Of course it would have to be legal in more than one state to qualify as interstate commerce.

[monkeyshine]

It doesn’t matter. USSC already ruled that Congress can ban the home growing of Marijuana. The USSC cited the commerce clause to come to that decision. We can all agree that the logic is flawed, that it is impossible to effect the commerce of something that isn’t allowed to be sold or traded.

Though if someone smokes MJ instead of taking a Xanax tablet you could argue that it did effect the interstate commerce of Xanax. However I don’t think the government argued that. They argued that it effected the interstate commerce of marijuana. Even though it is an illegal trade. Bizarre and ludicrous but there it is.