<P> Respondents Diane Monson and Angel Raich use marijuana that has never been bought or sold, that has never crossed state lines, and that has had no demonstrable effect on the national market for marijuana . If Congress can regulate this under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually anything--and the federal Government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers . </P> <P> The evolving level of scrutiny applied by Federal courts to Commerce Clause cases should be considered in the context of rational basis review . The idea behind rational basis review is that the judiciary must show deference to the elected representatives of the people . A respect for the democratic process requires that the Courts uphold legislation if there are rational facts and reasons that could support Congressional judgment, even if the Justices would come to different conclusions . Throughout the 20th century, in a variety of contexts, courts sought to avoid second guessing the legislative branch, and Commerce Clause jurisprudence can be seen as a part of this trend . Lawrence Tribe states: </P> <P> Since 1937, in applying the factual test in Jones & Laughlin to hold a broad range of activities sufficiently related to interstate commerce, the Supreme Court has exercised little independent judgment, choosing instead to defer to the expressed or implied findings of Congress to the effect that regulated activities have the requisite "economic effect". Such findings have been upheld whenever they could be said to rest upon some rational basis . (Citing Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v United States (1964).) </P> <P> Justice Rehnquist echoed this point in his opinion in United States v. Lopez, stating: "Since (Wickard), the Court has...undertaken to decide whether a rational basis existed for concluding that a regulated activity sufficiently affected interstate commerce . See, e.g., Hodel v. Virginia Surface Mining & Reclamation Association, 452 U.S. 264, 276--280 (1981); Perez v. United States, 402 U.S. 146, 155--156 (1971); Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States, 379 U.S. 241, 252--253 (1964)." </P>

Where does the federal regulatory power come from