Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Kaslin
the penalty imposed for not having “qualifying” health insurance is not a fine, penalty, or fee, but rather a tax.

An obviously self-contradictory statement. Of course it is a penalty, otherwise the tax would have been imposed from the outset instead of upon revelation that an individual had not purchased qualifying health care coverage. Roberts was completely in the wrong on this issue. Any Justice that ruled that the Federal Government can force a citizen to purchase something should be removed from the bench.

6 posted on 05/21/2018 6:18:00 AM PDT by rjsimmon (The Tree of Liberty Thirsts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: rjsimmon

‘Roberts was completely in the wrong on this issue.’

And he knows he was wrong:

“the Court’s job is not to create or alter legislation; that power, at the federal level, belongs to Congress alone.”

Roberts handed them a gift he had no Constitutional right to give.


9 posted on 05/21/2018 6:47:37 AM PDT by Heart of Georgia (truth will trump their lies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: rjsimmon
The fact that the ObamaCare "penalty" is calculated and imposed through a taxpayer's Federal income tax return, and enforced by the IRS, would surely make this a TAX no matter how you look at it.

It may be a ridiculous tax, but it's a tax nonetheless.

This is exactly what Roberts meant when he said that it's not the job of the U.S. Supreme Court to fix a stupid law.

14 posted on 05/22/2018 4:20:24 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("I saw a werewolf drinking a pina colada at Trader Vic's.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: rjsimmon
Of course it is a penalty, otherwise the tax would have been imposed from the outset instead of upon revelation that an individual had not purchased qualifying health care coverage.

The plaintiffs in that case (various states in the U.S.) would have been much better off challenging a completely different provision of ObamaCare: the authority of the Federal government to define "qualifying health care coverage" and to prohibit insurance companies from selling insurance plans that don't meet those standards.

For that matter ... How many states have even come up with strategies to reduce health care costs by developing insurance models that ignore some of these ridiculous provisions of ObamaCare? Idaho has recently announced that it would consider allowing "non-ACA compliant" plans to be sold in that state. What the hell took them so long to do this?

15 posted on 05/22/2018 4:26:03 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("I saw a werewolf drinking a pina colada at Trader Vic's.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson