There is a difference between a tax deduction for what you do and a tax for something you don’t do.
Roberts crossed out the word “penalty” that appears in the law 15 times (and if it’s a penalty, it’s not a tax, as decades of court precedent establish) and rewrote “tax”.
He rewrote the law. That is judicial activism. Judges interpret, not rewrite, laws.
He is a total traitor and no conservative. This is lipstick on pig stuff and, as an attorney who studies constitutional law, I believe this article is nonsense.
You posted: There is a difference between a tax deduction for what you do and a tax for something you don’t do.
***
There may be a distinction, but the net result is a change in your tax liability, based upon not acting in a certain way. Whether it is by tax increase or deduction decrease, if failing to act in a government approved manner increases one’s tax liability, the result is the same.