He's right. The whole "it's legal, but illegal" thing is becoming tiresome. Everybody in government knows there's no putting the genie back in the bottle. What, the Feds are gonna start raiding dispensaries wholesale again? LOL, fuck off. There'd be riots and whatever party was in charge at the time would eat shit at the polls.
At this point prohibitionists are like those Japanese soldiers stranded on Pacific islands, fighting WWII into the 60's. The war is over. You lost. Find something new to complain about.
The left should beware the Thomas (Trojan) Horse, there's Federalism inside.
His complaint had to do with the technicalities as to IF the FEDS have the CONSTITUTIONAL POWER to make a LAW the states' citizens have to comply with. The technicality has to do with the dormant commerce clause that gives the FEDS that power when state law/action influences interstate commerce. The FEDS won in Gonzales v. Raich by saying the state's medical marijuana law that allowed for personal growth can be overcome by the federal prohibition. How can an individual who grows a small amount for personal, medical use on his own property and consumes that growth on the same property implicate interstate commerce?
He's trying to put the genie power of the feds back in the bottle. The Federalist papers generally pointed to the clause being a shield that protects the citizens of the state from federal power. Instead, due to decisions like Raich, it's used a sword to get federal power under any conceivable theory of commerce being affected. (A famous law found unconstitutional under the clause had to do with school firearms. People possessing a firearm within a certain distance from a school was made illegal federally. What does the possession of a firearm near a school have to do with commerce? Since there was no legislative finding on the matter, the Supremes found it unconstitutional as beyond federal power. It is said that all Congress needed to do was add a statement in the preamble saying something to the effect many firearms can be purchased in interstate commerce, therefore the law affects it, to make it all legal like. )
I am completely in Thomas' corner on this and other jurisprudence. I just want to warn those who LIKE more federal power might not want to tout Thomas' position too much. While you might like it on Cannabis, you won't like it on Gun Control. (And, a host of other issues.)