It does not matter what The Disaster calls the tax, it is still a tax, so Roberts was not wrong about that. I have not read the decision and was quite disappointed by it but from what I have discerned the decision is centered on the fact that a tax was passed.
But I thought that there were constitutional requirements for taxes. For one thing, I thought a tax imposed by the federal government was supposed to be levied equally on all, not on just a few or on a certain group of people (ie those that refuse to purchase health insurance, in this instance). Sure there are all kinds of exemptions and waivers and deductions that allow taxpayers to pay less. But the initial tax itself is levied evenly.
For the government to be able to single out one segment of Americans to selectively tax is, by its’ very nature, unconstitutional.
So, for it to really BE a tax, wouldn’t those same standards and requirements have to apply? And if so, wouldn’t that make Roberts wrong re: his ruling?