Your answer is misplaced Counselor, the question was not; Does the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801) exceed Congress' power under the commerce clause as applied to the intrastate cultivation and possession of marijuana for medical use?
Any person who would champion the argument that Congress does not have the power to “do whatever they want” in the commerce clause supported by the sweeping power of the “necessary and proper clause” is a fool.
You were right to quote Mr. Justice JOHN PAUL STEVENS when he wrote; “The similarities between this case and Wickard are striking” both wheat and marijuana belong to the plant family and both Wickard and Raich were raising wheat and marijuana for their own use but, unless you know a farmer who has lost his farm animals, his farm equipment, his farm, and put in federal prison for a medieval sentence without parole, your reference to Wickard and Gonzales v. Raich was misplaced also. You might remember that any person at random is able to raise 10 acres of wheat without government intervention and “Special Agents” from the DEA “pulled out all six marijuana plants and destroyed them” in Raich!
However, “(a) Except as authorized in this subchapter” forms the NEXUS to; “Persons registered by the Attorney General” to possess, manufacture, distribute, and dispense controlled substances “to the extent authorized by their registration” referencing Title 21 U.S.C. §821 and Congress power to “authorize” the Attorney General “to promulgate rules and regulations” for regulated persons and regulated transactions and therefore; “any person” NOT REGISTERED is STATUTORILY EXEMPT from the ambit of federal jurisdictional authority to enforce the language of the Controlled Substance Act of 1970!
I would argue that both Wickard and Raich are cases of material breach of a real and binding contractual agreement where money changed hands between the registrant and a representative of the central government creating privileges, obligations, and liabilities, called; “terms” and therefore, a violation of both the Agriculture Act and the Controlled Substance Act is a Civil Matter of Equity, NOT a federal crime!
I’m sorry Counselor, you did not answer my question, WHY? Because there is no NEXUS to the Constitution’s Eighteen Enumerated Powers for federal jurisdictional authority over “any person” NOT REGISTERED for federal jurisdiction to be federally regulated in the closed commercial system of Controlled Substances, and therefore, the executive and judicial branch of the government of the United States LACK FEDERAL JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY to respectively, arrest, prosecute, convict, and punish “any person” NOT REGULATED!
Nice try! But you shouldn’t feel alone, Congress, the Supremes, and the entire legal community should know, or they ought to know, that to “take-away” any of the People’s “unalienable Right” perpetually protected and secured in the text of the Constitution to buy, sell, use, or abuse mustard, marijuana, cabbage, cocaine, hot-dogs, heroin, hallucinates, or controlled substances, whatever they are now or ever will be, takes an Amendment to the Constitution and a two-thirds vote YEA by both Houses of Congress and ratified by two thirds of the states!
It’s NOT the subject matter of “drugs or other substances” Counselor, it’s the Constitution for self-government by “WE, the people” Guaranteed by the Original Ten Articles of Amendment thereto that is the issue here and NO! I'm not a lawyer!