As usual I can't say I'm impressed with the court.
On one hand the court twisted concepts to redefine a fine as a tax. To fine someone for not purchasing a private product is a bit much. The method of the fine is getting close to being a bill of attainder, hence should have been tossed. The court chose to redefine it as a tax when the other two branches were adamant that it wasn't.
Yet requiring states provide Medicaid to people unable to afford private products is a "gun to the head".
Somehow fining one group is just peachy, yet not giving as much money to the other group is unacceptable. In the end corporations make money, and many people still fall through the cracks.
no subject
On one hand the court twisted concepts to redefine a fine as a tax. To fine someone for not purchasing a private product is a bit much. The method of the fine is getting close to being a bill of attainder, hence should have been tossed. The court chose to redefine it as a tax when the other two branches were adamant that it wasn't.
Yet requiring states provide Medicaid to people unable to afford private products is a "gun to the head".
Somehow fining one group is just peachy, yet not giving as much money to the other group is unacceptable. In the end corporations make money, and many people still fall through the cracks.