[Kenny]

I’m actually starting to agree with this. The individual mandate was the most important piece and it was struck down. That would have been irreversible damage if that had been upheld.

So Congress can tax, no news there. It’s the political backlash that keeps them from over-exercising that piece.

Hmmm, might not be so bad.

[MayflowerMadam]

“So Congress can tax,...”

AND... Congress can repeal taxes. Even better.

[mmichaels1970]

I’m actually starting to agree with this.

Sad to hear that. With all due respect, I would suggest we forget Roberts for a second. Now make a list of the justices that voted for and against Obamacare as a whole. Now drop Roberts onto the list that matches his vote.

Do you still feel the same way?

[usnavy_cop_retired]

Without having completely read the opinion, I agree that now all who voted for ObamaCare will have to defend their vote for a TAX! This is a very potent political add and debate tool for the conservatives. Look at the San Diego newspaper poll on this, last time I looked it was 63% against the USSC opinion on ObamaCare, (should now be called ObamaTax). So if the Tea Party and conservatives hammer the Dems with this TAX, they will attract a lot more Independents. My thoughts.

[reformedliberal]

Easier to overturn a tax in the Senate than a *mandate*.

Also, States would have fewer problems if they declined all Federal aid.

H’mmm. That might mean declining educational block grants and therefore refusing the Federalization of education.

[jaydee770]

So Congress can tax, no news there

The wealthy will be more free than you are. That is what this precedent has wrought. Roberts precedent says congress can lay & collect taxes to compel compliance simply for you doing nothing but minding your own business. Roberts indicated no limitations on the power to lay and collect those taxes, nor how excessively high those taxes may be. It is limited only by the imagination of congress. When some future ""do-gooder" lib-majority congress decides to micro-manage your existence further (because *they* know what's best for you), the only way to regain your freedom is to buy your way out of it by paying whatever additional-penalty-tax. If you can't afford it, then you risk suffering the full weight & force of the IRS for your rebellion.

Roberts ruling could also bless the imposition of a %10,000 tax on firearms purchases. It's not "infringing" on the 2nd Amendment because you can still buy a gun (if you can afford it). It's just congress "laying & collecting taxes". Roberts *clearly* said it was NOT the SCOTUS' job to protect us from the consequences of the ass-hats we might vote into office -- apparently, even if those consequences are patently unconstitutional. Following that logic, could some future congress (insert some infringing legislation here) if you paid an additional penalty-tax?

Now, we *could* trust our fellow citizens not to elect jack-ass, do-gooder libs to congress and we'll have no worries, right? Except, how do you explain Kucinich, Pelosi, Grayson, Jackson-lee, etc. etc. etc... Dems and Repubs seem to take turns as the majority party in congress. How big of a pair of dice are you willing to roll with that next majority dem congress? And I'm not so sure about the establishment GOP 's propensity for dreaming up meddling ideas either.

You may not be all that worried by the ruling, but I'm reasonably and prudently concerned.