[Bubba Ho-Tep]

We can CONSENT to some level of taxation -- agree via social contract to give up some portion of our lives for the good of the Collective. But when government leave us no choice, when it coerces money from us at the point of a gun, then yes, it is involuntary servitude and tyranny at its worst.

But isn't a constitutional amendment the very mechanism of consent you describe?

[IronJack]

Ratification of an amendment doesn’t exempt the amendment from constitutional review. While ratification does constitute assent, that alone isn’t enough to ensure consistency with existing provisions. We could, for example, ratify an amendment forbidding women from voting. But since that contradicts the 19th, the Court would have to strike down one or the other. Look at the 18th and 21st. The latter was enacted to specifically repeal the former. It had to or it would have set up an internal contradiction.