It's a bit of expansion of Federal power but not nearly as dramatic as many here are making out. It is Disappointing if we expect Roberts to reverse those type of precedents as Scalia would do.
The expectation that the personal mandate would bring the whole bill down is probably why the big disappointment.
It's an reverse tax credit with no penalty for avoiding it. For example, if you owe no taxable income and are not required to file a tax return then the IRS is not allowed to come after you for it.
In the opinion Roberts wrote something that may not go over well here but it rings true with me as I commented late last night. It said :” It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices”.
Like it or not voters put Dems in power in 2009. To be honest by the time Obama-care got passed with the Reconcilation bait and switch trick I was having my doubts that Obama would get a single bill to his desk to sign. Everyone hated that Obama-care bill, especially the (socialist) progressives and many of them swore on TV that they would not vote for it without a public plan, then they did. It really showed Pelosi's effectiveness as a leader of the house that she pulled that off. Boehner is half the man she is.
It IS YOUR JOB, John, to rule on the constitutionality of the law, AND YOU FAILED!!!
He is right about that, but is it his job to rewrite leftist laws (penalty ->tax) to protect them from the consequences of their authors' sleazy machinations?
“not nearly as dramatic as many here are making out”
But it allows for the authority to tax behavior. Therefore it is even more dramatic than most have yet to comprehend.