Quote Originally Posted by Tahuyaman View Post
They didn’t oppose the ACA because of a tax or fee. They opposed it because government has no business ordering you to purchase a particular product.

Scalia used the example of government requiring one to buy broccoli.

If participation in the ACA had been made voluntary, no one would have had an issue with it.
Again you lie. Why do you do it?

Perhaps the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will attain the enduring status of the Social Security Act or the Taft-Hartley Act; perhaps not. But this Court’s two decisions on the Act will surely be remembered through the years. The somersaults of statutory interpretation they have performed (“penalty” means tax, “further [Medicaid] payments to the State” means only incremental Medicaid payments to the State, “established by the State” means not established by the State) will be cited by litigants endlessly, to the confusion of honest jurisprudence. And the cases will publish forever the discouraging truth that the Supreme Court of the United States favors some laws over others, and is prepared to do whatever it takes to uphold and assist its favorites.
I dissent.