U.S. v Lopez/Gonzalez v. Raich

"In 1996, California voters passed the Compassionate Use Act which authorized the use of medicinal marijuana.  Drugs which were prescribed by doctors were seized from homes by the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA).  California's law also was in conflict with the Controlled Substances Act.  Medicinal marijuana users argued that Congress had exceeded its powers under the Commerce clause and the Controlled Substances Act.    

In the Gonzales case, the court held in a 6-3 decision that Congress did not exceed its powers under Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution.  The court ruled that Congress could ban marijuana production because it was part of a national marijuana market. "    

Identify the constitutional clause that is common to both Lopez v US and Gonzales v Raich.    

Based on the Constitutional Clause identified in part A, explain why the facts of US v Lopez led to a different holding than the Gonzales case? 

Describe an action that members of the public who disagree with the holding in Gonzales could take to limit its impact?