Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: LouAvul

They have to keep everything contained within the state so that the Commerce Clause cannot be cited as the Constitutional authority for the feds to be involved.


26 posted on 05/04/2013 12:47:04 PM PDT by butterdezillion (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: butterdezillion
They have to keep everything contained within the state so that the Commerce Clause cannot be cited as the Constitutional authority for the feds to be involved.

Not so:

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.

J. Scalia, Raich

____________________________________________________________

Drug warriors cheered at the time.

49 posted on 05/04/2013 1:37:39 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

To: butterdezillion
They have to keep everything contained within the state so that the Commerce Clause cannot be cited as the Constitutional authority for the feds to be involved.

But in Gonzales v. Raich (the medical marijuana case), the Supreme Court held (with Scalia concurring) that marijuana grown and consumed solely in California, and never sold anywhere to anyone, could be prohibited under the Interstate Commerce Clause.

78 posted on 05/04/2013 4:52:17 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson