Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: abigail2

“The Affordable Care Act’s requirement that certain individuals pay a financial penalty for not obtaining health insurance may reasonably be characterized as a tax,” wrote Chief Justice John Roberts, in his majority opinion. “Because the Constitution permits such a tax, it is not our role to forbid it, or to pass upon its wisdom or fairness.”

A financial penalty for not buying something is a tax? How so?

How does the Constitution permit such a tax? What was his reasoning?

It appears to me that the SC rewrote the legislation.


50 posted on 06/28/2012 1:11:57 PM PDT by mom.mom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: mom.mom
A financial penalty for not buying something is a tax? How so?

It's economic fascism.

Roberts stabbed the Great Republic through the heart today. THAT is his legacy.

78 posted on 06/28/2012 3:33:06 PM PDT by BlatherNaut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

To: mom.mom
Not only that, but the word “tax” was kept out of the Legislation because it wouldn't have passed the Senate. So the Supreme Court just decides to put the “tax” back in that was never there? So now the SC writes law?
84 posted on 06/28/2012 4:00:33 PM PDT by MacMattico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson