Tell that to John Roberts and the "affordable care act".
Yes, along with the Supreme Court’s 19th century clarification that regulating insurance, the unconstitutional Obamacare mandate for example, is not within Congress’s Commerce Clause powers (1.8.3). This is regardless if buyer and seller are not domiciled in same state, and regardless that FDR’s state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices later overturned this clarification.
"4. The issuing of a policy of insurance is not a transaction of commerce within the meaning of the latter of the two clauses, even though the parties be domiciled in different States, but is a simple contract [emphases added] of indemnity against loss.” —Paul v. Virginia, 1869. (The corrupt feds have no Commerce Clause (1.8.3) power to regulate insurance.)
Note that although United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters (select case), which overturned Paul v. Virginia, references Gibbons v. Ogden, the following excerpt from Gibbons v. Ogden is not included in US v. South-Eastern Underwriters opinion, correction welcome.
"State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added]." -Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.