Didn't Raich pretty much reverse those limitations?
______________________________________________________
...the authority to enact laws necessary and proper for the regulation of interstate commerce is not limited to laws governing intrastate activities that substantially affect interstate commerce. Where necessary to make a regulation of interstate commerce effective, Congress may regulate even those intrastate activities that do not themselves substantially affect interstate commerce.
Scalia concurring in Raich
The new federal hate crimes law is not a regulation adopted in order to make regulation of interstate commerce effective.
To my mind, the analysis would be that of Morrison and Lopez, where the federal government is attempting to regulate activities that are not commerce and for a purpose that is not intended to supplement a larger federal scheme of regulating interstate commerce.
Growing crops (including marijuana), by contrast, at least deals with questions of commerce. I view Morrison and Lopez as being a different line of analysis than Raich and the upcoming Obamacare decision.
However, five liberal justices would rubber stamp the hate crimes law no matter what the analysis.
...the authority to enact laws necessary and proper for the regulation of interstate commerce is not limited to laws governing intrastate activities that substantially affect interstate commerce. Where necessary to make a regulation of interstate commerce effective, Congress may regulate even those intrastate activities that do not themselves substantially affect interstate commerce.Scalia concurring in Raich
Sometimes you feel like you should just stay in bed. Other times it's like H. L. Mencken said: "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats."
The utterly irritating, frustrating, and intolerable thing about this is the sheer injustice BLATANTLY being paraded about as if it were Justice.