[Bratch]

But if it's a tax bill, it shouldn't have been considered by the courts until the taxes are actually levied.

The Chief Justice seems to want to be able to have it both ways. I disagree.

Either it's not a tax bill, and

- the courts can rule on the case,

- it's unconstitutional because the mandate can't be justified by the Commerce Clause.

Otherwise, it's a tax bill, which means the courts have no standing yet to consider the case.

Confusing, ain't it?

[philman_36]

But if it's a tax bill, it shouldn't have been considered by the courts until the taxes are actually levied.
Wasn't it necessary to first find out if it was even Constitutional to enact such a tax?

Confusing, ain't it?
Not really. The cart comes after the horse, not before.