The power to tax allows the government to use taxes for policy reasons.
So, tax or fine? Even Obama used whatever word best fit him at the time.
Either way, this still is a specious way for the government to get around the fact that the Constitution granted no right to the federal government to force people to buy anything.
Fistful didn't really read the opinion. It's about why interpretation needs to consider what congress was attempting to do, rather than for example what a court wants the legislation to do. If wording is ambiguous, then you consider what congress attempted to do and interpret so as to avoid perverse/frustrating outcomes.
Which of course is the opposite of judicial activism.
That's the problem; the wording WASN'T ambiguous it was very clear; the STATES need to set up exchanges so the people can be subsidized. We have plenty from that arrogant whackadoodle Herr Gruber to KNOW just exactly what the government was up to.
As to considering
"what congress attempted to do and interpret so as to avoid perverse/frustrating outcomes,"in the long run IMHO I believe we would be far better off if the court would limit itself to strict application of the written law in question to the Constitution. Should nasty consequences arise and cause people grief ..... there's a lesson in there;
NEXT VOTING DAY, BE MORE CAREFUL FOR WHOM YOU PULL THAT LEVER! Maybe if the kongresskritters get enough grief from the voters they might listen.
What do parents do with a child who will not listen? Consider the following: A couple's young son likes to play in the front yard -- fine, but he often runs out into a busy street. The father runs out, grabs his hand and drags him back, and wants to discipline the kid, but the loving mother (being the so called "weaker vessel"), who loves her dear son and wishes he experience no grief, intervenes and prevents it. This pattern continues until one day the kid runs out and
!*WHAM!* a Mack truck turns the kid into a grease stain on the tarmac. Now the mother is REALLY UPSET.
Okay, not a great analogy perhaps. But as the mother refused to see the consequences, so are our knngresskritters also not taking any consequences when SCOTUS will twist the -- YES --
plain meaning of the words.
Sometimes
"perverse/frustrating outcomes" can be a great educational tool.
When it's used...............
