Seems like Scalia ...

.
... may have gotten some religion about the Commerce Clause:

Justice Scalia writes, for instance, that he has little use for a central precedent the Obama administration has cited to justify the health care law under the Constitution’s commerce clause, Wickard v. Filburn.

In that 1942 decision, Justice Scalia writes, the Supreme Court “expanded the Commerce Clause beyond all reason” by ruling that “a farmer’s cultivation of wheat for his own consumption affected interstate commerce and thus could be regulated under the Commerce Clause.”…

Of course, he did invoke Wickard when he voted with the majority on Raich. And when he had the opportunity to rule using the correct basis in McDonald, he thought that might be too hard.

I won't hold my breath ...

pm