[uncbob]

Good points

I would assume that Thomas— Alito— Kennedy—Scalia— were in agreement on those points

Wonder what their rebuttal was to the tax part or if they thought it was still unconstitutional even if a tax

[tentmaker]

The dissent, authored by Kennedy, argues that the mandate is framed as a penalty by the bill and even though arguments presented before the court attempted to call it a tax, it remains a penalty. Assuming this point of view, the mandate fails on all three counts: commerce clause, necessary and proper clause, as a tax. That makes it un-constitutional. (in the view of the dissent)

The dissent notes:

No one has ever doubted that the Constitution authorizes the Federal Government to spend money, but for many years the scope of this power was unsettled. The Constitution grants Congress the power to collect taxes “to . . . provide for the . . . general Welfare of the United States,” Art. I, §8, cl. 1, and from “the foundation of the Nation sharp differences of opinion have persisted as to the true interpretation of the phrase” “the general welfare.”