Libertarian talking point. "Commerce" is cited because it is convenient. The court's gave broad powers in their Wickard decision, so "why not use them" is the thinking of various legal officials. Why would they want to fight the issue out for another justification when they've already got "Wickard"? Why work for something when you don't have to?
A more rational authorization for drug interdiction is in the section responsible for defending the nation. Drugs are no different than chemical or biological weapons, and therefore the constitution authorizes the government to stop them.
Nonsense - nobody uses chemical or biological weapons against themselves.
Actually commerce is cited here because that's what the USSC uses to justify the War on Drugs.
I agree that it is laziness/convenience that they use Wickard, but the fact is that they do use it.
> A more rational authorization for drug interdiction is in the section responsible for defending the nation. Drugs are no different than chemical or biological weapons, and therefore the constitution authorizes the government to stop them.
Except there's a huge difference: chemical and biological weapons are deployed regardless of the will of those exposed to it; while, on the other hand, drugs aren't used by those who don't want them.