"The application of the commerce clause in Raich only makes logical sense to statist lawyers."
Well, okay, fine, but you're still stuck with it. You can have total unanimity from everybody at this website, but so what? You can have 99% of the US population in agreement with you, but again, so what? Once SCOTUS rules, the hunt is over.
Much of the opening commentary of the Inforwars essay is Pi in the Sky BS. States can pass whatever laws or resolutions they want, but the feds have the bigger hammer. The only hope any state has in this BS is to file suit in federal court and go on up to SCOTUS--gun stuff, marijuana, or the legalization of mopery with intent to gawk. Newman's pipedream ain't worth the paper it ain't written on.
And to suggest that the romantic tale that's given in the second half of Ross' UC is anything other than a divertissment is foolish in the extreme--and tantamount to advocating breaking the law. Not real smart.
IANAL. But I've been around since before they hauled in dirt. Folks would do better to keep the pressure on their Congresscritters, in particular reminding any recalcitrant Representative that there's an election in two years. Nattering about nullification is about as useful as peeing in the whiskey.
You're from BATFE? Come right in! I use all your fine products!