Also, how can the interstate commerce clause have anything to do with a device manufactured and possessed in a single state?
Back in the early 2000's, the 9th Circuit said that a homegrown cannabis plant for personal medical use was NOT interstate commerce in the Raich case. At about the same time, in the US v Stewart case, they also said that a homegrown machine gun for personal use was NOT interstate commerce.
Both cases went to the SCOTUS. They took the Raich case first and held the Stewart case. The SCOTUS reversed the 9th and said that a homegrown cannabis plant for personal medical use actually IS interstate commerce. They then sent the US v Stewart case back to the 9th with a note that said, "See Raich and try again."
The 9th complied, and redecided the case, this time concluding that Stewart's machine gun was, in fact, interstate commerce. Both opinions by Kozinski are worth reading.
For those who think Scalia will save us, go and
review what he wrote in concurrence with the Raich case.
You are exactly correct. Scalia screwed us and the Constitution over royally with the Raich case. I think it was mostly because he thought he had to come up with a way to continue the war on some drugs. The ruling was pure insanity, and basicly grants the federal government power over every aspect of our lives.