[wool_gather]

Well, there is this hilarious statement by SCOTUS (an opinion penned by Scalia):

> Where necessary to make a regulation of interstate commerce effective, Congress may regulate even those intrastate activities that do not themselves substantially affect interstate commerce.

From 2005's Gonzales v. Raich

[throwaway0a5e]

I haven't read the case but he was likely paraphrasing Wickard v. Filburn when he wrote that since that's where federal judicial approval of that sentiment comes from. The idea that feds can regulate noncommercial intrastate activity in order to affect interstate commerce is way older than 2005.

[wool_gather]

Yeah, you're not really wrong, and I'm only an amateur SCOTUS watcher anyways. I just find the contortions of that sentence, and especially the fact that Scalia, the arch-originalist, wrote it, wryly amusing.

[lersrvwtogether]

One might've thought that a conservative court would halt inappropriate expansion of federal power in order to preserve small, limited government and liberty.

Liberty of the governed to set laws at a local level (where they do not conflict with Constitutionally-protected rights and powers enumerated to the federal government).