But as more than one person here has pointed out to you - and others - There was another “commerce policy” that banned alcohol. And that one required an amendment to the Constitution.
What is different about marijuana that its prohibition does not require the same?
It would seem to me that back then, people realized that the Federal Government didn’t have the power to “ban” anything - even something “commerce-related” without passing an amendment to give them that power - no matter how detrimental to society they thought it was.
Today we just say “it’s interstate commerce” as if those are the magic words that allow whatever we need to allow to make those who want one thing or another happy.
Problem is - the Constitution either means what it says *in all areas* or it doesn’t mean anything it says in any area. You can’t have it both ways no matter how many times the Supreme Court and politicians have said you can.
And on another note - I’m actually in agreement with state governments who don’t want to round up illegal aliens. The Federal Government is Constitutionally tasked with policing the border and immigration. If I’m a state governor there is no way I’m going to use my citizen’s money and police power to house and feed hundreds or thousands of illegal aliens while I wait for the Feds to show up and take them off my hands.
Perhaps the Federal Government should divert a bunch of money from the thousands of unconstitutional programs they run (medicare/medicaid/social security...etc) to pay for the necessary *federal* agents to round up and deport those who are here illegally instead of expecting citizens of the individual states to pick up the tab.
Or even better, dismantle Obamacare, welfare, AFDC, food stamps, and all the other free (and unconstitutional) benefits that make the US such an appealing place for most “refugees” and watch them leave on their own.
And no - I don’t mean dismantle them *just* for illegals. Dismantle them completely.
At least you are consistent. I’ll give you that.