Which side of this bright line will the Supreme Court be on?

Some pundits think that the Supreme court will find Obamacare unconstitutional, in part because of the individual mandate. WSJ

the New York Times reported that administration officials were preparing to argue in court that the individual mandate — or, more precisely, the penalty for failing to comply with it — is an excise tax. This is an awkward political position, since the president himself insisted in an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos last September that it was nothing of the sort. It’s an awkward legal argument, too, since there is no language in the ObamaCare law to support it: “The bill doesn’t say excise tax,” Mr. Barnett says. “The bill does have excise taxes in it. Tanning salons are subject to an excise tax. Medical devices are subject to an excise tax…

the “individual mandate” — the requirement that all Americans purchase medical insurance or pay a fine — has been the focus of the lawsuits by state attorneys general seeking to overturn ObamaCare…”Never has the tax power been used to mandate that everybody engage in an activity with a private company either. Just because you switch the claim of what you’re doing, doesn’t make it any less unprecedented.” Mr. Barnett doesn’t think the justices will buy the tax-power argument. If they did, “from then on in, Congress could prohibit or mandate anything, as long as they limit themselves to a fine. Anything. It would be unlimited power in Congress.”

On the other hand, everything depends on the kind of Supreme Court America has at the time the issue is joined.

Leave a Reply