[CitizenUSA]

Constitution gives fed the right to regulate interstate commerce, so they have the right to regulate pot commerce that crosses state lines. However, Justice Thomas was following the constitution when he said fed had no right to regulate pot within a state. I think it was Gonzales v. Raich in 2005, but Justice Thomas was in the minority unfortunately. Blame Wickard v. Filburn.

[fr_freak]

Constitution gives fed the right to regulate interstate commerce, so they have the right to regulate pot commerce that crosses state lines. However, Justice Thomas was following the constitution when he said fed had no right to regulate pot within a state.

Yes, that's exactly correct. And the fed clearly overstepped their boundaries when they decided they could dictate what someone could grow in his backyard or smoke in his house.

However, a case could also be made that the federal government's role in regulating interstate commerce does not extend to the power to make anything illegal. They were merely to be a mediator between States.

[frithguild]

Read the Thomas dissent in U.S. v Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995).