[MamaTexan]

My response dealt with just how far that “IS NO” extended in your opinion.

No, your response was to dodge an assertion by asking questions instead of offering a rebuttal.

----

Visas, passports and tariffs are regulations on the border and accepted as constitutional by the courts.

Ah. Now you jump from items to 'persons'.

Well, at least you're consistent....

------

I can quote too, if not verbatim, ‘The Constitution is not a suicide pact’.

You're correct, it is not.

It is a treaty between the States for the creation of an administrative organ with a few specified powers.

So again I ask-

Please show me the Constitutional authority possessed by the federal government to regulate or prohibit 'drugs'.

-----

"The constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government - lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."
--Patrick Henry

[count-your-change]

The courts have held that the Commerce Clause gives the feds such authority. The constitution does not discuss drugs per se.
And regulate is regulate, you made no such distinction in your comment, item or persons. If you want a precise reply you'll have to be precise yourself.