[zeroonetwothree]

It wouldn’t require an amendment today. Sadly the courts have supported a huge increase in the federal government’s police power over the years.

[pc86]

It didn't require an amendment in the past either.

[mcbits]

The Supreme Court could have chosen not to interpret the Commerce Clause so broadly to say that not engaging in interstate commerce affects interstate commerce and therefore counts as interstate commerce (IIRC that started with wheat, not drugs), in which case most federal drug laws would not apply unless the activity actually involved interstate commerce. Then an amendment would be needed.

[pc86]

Yes, had things been different they would have been different. I'm not sure what the point of that statement is, honestly.