Our absurd Supreme Court

Avik Roy was talking about the recent ruling that Obamacare's core mandate was unconstitutional when he made the following aside.  He is wearily aware of the gross unconstitutional overreaching of our Federal Courts so he made it in a rather blase fashion.  But read the paragraph.  It's stunning what our courts do to our liberty on a regular basis.

There are two key Supreme Court cases that dramatically broadened the Constitutional provision that allows Congress to regulate “interstate commerce”: Wickard v. Filburn, a 1942 case in which the Supreme Court absurdly ruled that a man growing wheat to feed his chickens was conducting interstate commerce, even though he had no intention to sell it; and Gonzales v. Raich, a similarly suspect 2005 case in which the Court agreed that the Commerce Clause allowed Congress to regulate the ability of a man to grow marijuana in his own home for his own use.

Why can't these bastards just leave us alone?  Oh, I know:  they're fascists and to fascists, power not exercised is a net dead weight loss to them.  So all power must be gathered to the center and then handed back - "devolved"  in policyspeak - to the states or the people.  This of course is the exact opposite of the the plain reading of the Tenth Amendment.  But never mind, they're experts, you see.