More Like Gibbons Than Marbury

You may also like...

2 Responses

  1. And, of course, if for some reason it does want to regulate inactivity in the future, it can simply structure the regulation as a tax!

  2. Joe says:

    We “enter the marketplace” now in various ways that a full fledged understanding of interstate commerce would cover the PPACA. Roberts says as much in a fashion when talking about how “economists” might disagree with the Court’s position.

    But, an artificial exception was made here since it was felt this went too far. A law that, though its so-called illicit idea has been talked for years, is seen as a simply unexpected bridge too far. Who is the to say the ethos of the ruling will not apply to some other law?

    Lopez, Morrison et. al. might not be “meaningful” enough, but it got four justices to believe that this law was unconstitutional. Roberts didn’t go that far, but what if was not such a major piece of legislation?