Quote:
|
Of course, the Congress has stated that their powers extend to intrastate commerce as well; but I don't believe the SCotUS has ever found that link.
|
The Supremes have essentially found that there is no such thing as intrastate commerce when the subject is fungible.
Wickard v. Filburn and
Gonzales v. Reich both allow for the regulation of purely intrastate activity on the basis that the activities (producing wheat in the former case and marijuana in the latter, both for purely personal use) affets interstate commerce. If you weren't making it for yourself, you'd be buying it on the market. The aggregate effect of people not purchasing on the market would definitely affect interstate commerce, and thus bring the intrastate activity within Congress' authority.