[kevao]

Well, I don’t know how he can say that Congress doesn’t have the power to force people to buy health insurance, but it does have the power to enact a tax that will be imposed on people who refuse to do so. He is in essence saying Congress can do indirectly what it doesn’t have the power to do directly. Very bad precedent.

What he is saying is that the government can't force people legally to buy health insurance, but it can coerce them financially to do so. To me, a distinction without a difference. But, then, I haven't be trained in the art of muddled thinking like our brilliant jurists have.

[Sirius Lee]

If this is a direct tax or capitation rather than a tax on income, then how is it Constitutional?

Or do we have to wait until tax year 2013 to have standing in order to bring that question before the Supremes?

It's a complete muddle.

[KevinB]

Yes, I get it. I am a lawyer and there are plenty of situations where the law does not allow one to do indirectly what cannot be done directly. I am perplexed by Roberts’ conclusion that Congress doesn’t have the power to force people to buy insurance but has the power to tax them if they don’t.