Today's Wall Street Journal has a piece about the lawsuit filed by Nebraska and Oklahoma against a neighboring state, Colorado, for the latter's purported legalization of recreational marijuana.  The column, by David Rivkin (a friend of mine) and Prof. Elizabeth Price Foley, starts thusly:

The attorneys general of Nebraska and Oklahoma have asked the Supreme Court to declare unconstitutional Colorado's law legalizing marijuana. The lawsuit states that, "The Constitution and the federal anti-drug laws do not permit the development of a patchwork of state and local pro-drug policies and licensed-distribution schemes throughout the country which conflict with federal laws."

Many conservatives have criticized Nebraska and Oklahoma for being "fair-weather federalists" because their claims hinge, in part, on Gonzales v. Raich, a 2005 Supreme Court decision, upholding the broad reach of Congress's power to regulate commerce.

Conservatives' ire instead should be directed at the Obama administration's decision to suspend enforcement of the federal law prohibiting marijuana--a decision so warping the rule of law that the complaining states' reliance on Raich is justified and necessary.