The best part of the decision, for me, were the dissents. The Chief and Thomas both wrote dissents, which in true conservative nature, talked about the founders intent and the law 200 years ago.

But they forgot the to mention that pot was legal 200 years ago. If we are going to base our laws today on anachronistic BS and try to figure out what Madison would do, go all the way and recognize that Washington grew hemp, it was legal, and the "founders intent" and practice was that it was legal.

Not to mention that the prevailing contitutional thought back in "the good ol days" was that the government couldn't tell a person what to consume. That's why prohibition had to be a constitutional amendment and early drug laws were based on tax theory. The gov had the power to tax, not outlaw possession of things.