ps: Anyone have thoughts on this?
Having read only headlines, this was my gut.
My facebook bud John DiMascio had these thoughts, which I will copy and paste without his knowledge or permission because they are good:
OK.... Kennedy states in the dissenting opinion stated that this decision didn't interpret the law as a tax, but literally re-wrote the law in order to uphold the mandate.
Now think about this. Tax Law must be initiated in House of Representatives. It can't start in the Senate, it can't be initiated by the President (although he can propose it.)
But according to the Constitution, all Tax Law must be originated in House.
Therefore, the Supreme Court just violated the "Separation of Powers." At most, the only thing the Court had the authority to do is to state that if it had been written as a tax instead of penalty, they could have upheld it....If the Obama Care penalty is a tax is was passed illegally. All tax legislation must begin in the House. This was the Senate version of the Bill which was marked up independently of the House version. The House passed it thinking it was a penalty. Therefore Congress violated the Constitution in the way this legislation was passed...The problem is that the decision says that the government can now tax inactivity. Normally you get taxed on a transaction (ie monies paid for work or a sales tax). Even the death tax is imposed because money goes from he deceased to the heirs. So there is an exchange of money. Property tax at municipal level is a tax because you own something. This tax amounts to a selective head tax. The government will tax you simply for being alive and residing in the country if you don't participate in a particular transaction. That is not necessarily unconstitutional but it is unprecedented.