Justice Thomas actually got it right in his dissenting vote in the case of Gonzales v. Raich. He went against the “drug warriors” in a clear understanding of what the Constitution actually means. Portions of his dissenting opinion follow below:

The Respondent’s local cultivation and consumption of
marijuana is not “Commerce … among the several States.
“Certainly no evidence from the founding suggests that
“commerce” included the mere possession of a good or some
personal activity that did not involve trade or exchange for value.
In the early days of the Republic, it would have been unthinkable
that Congress could prohibit the local cultivation, possession, and
consumption of marijuana.

If the Federal Government can regulate growing a
half-dozen cannabis plants for personal consumption (not because it
is interstate commerce, but because it is inextricably bound up with
interstate commerce), then Congress’ Article I powers – as expanded
by the Necessary and Proper Clause – have no meaningful limits.
Whether Congress aims at the possession of drugs, guns, or any number
of other items, it may continue to “appropria[te] state police
powers under the guise of regulating commerce.”

If the majority is to be taken seriously, the Federal
Government may now regulate quilting bees, clothes drives, and
potluck suppers throughout the 50 States. This makes a mockery of
Madison’s assurance to the people of New York that the “powers
delegated” to the Federal Government are “few and defined”,
while those of the States are “numerous and indefinite.”

For what its worth I voted in favor of Decrim and Legalization while serving in the NH Legislature.