I’m no drug-addled libertarian, but I fail to see how a “Schedule I drug” or a “Controlled Substances Act” has any basis in constitutional law.
Drug-addled libertarian!
Seriesly, federal drug laws, like most of the federal Leviathan, are founded on an FDR-era "substantial effect" test that has no basis in the language of the Constitution. True American conservatives cannot support this - although right-statists posing as conservatives do.
The liberal reading of the commerce clause allowed this. Before this all congress could do is ban sales across state lines, however now congress calls all commerce interstate commerce and can regulate anything.
Sadly, we partly have Scalia to thank for that. He concurred with the liberal majority in Gonzales v. Raich, which held that the Controlled Substances Act was valid under the Commerce Clause, even when applied to an individual growing small amounts of marijuana for his own use. Scalia differed from the majority’s reasoning only in that he believed the CSA’s application in this case was authorized under the Necessary and Proper Clause rather than the Commerce Clause itself. O’Connor, Thomas, and Rehnquist dissented.