Michael S. Rozeff
lewrockwell.com
June 28, 2012

Michael Eversden pointed this out to me, so I read that portion of the decision, and it’s true: The Supreme Court says that the fine is not a tax for one purpose (getting the case to be considered despite the Anti-Injunction Act) and is a tax for another purpose (the Constitution). The relevant portion of a paragraph reads:

“The Affordable Care Act describes the payment as a ‘penalty,’ not a ‘tax.’ That label cannot control whether the payment is a tax for purposes of the Constitution, but it does determine the application of the Anti-Injunction Act. The Anti-Injunction Act therefore does not bar this suit.”

Unbelievable!


NEWSLETTER SIGNUP

Get the latest breaking news & specials from Alex Jones and the Infowars Crew.

Related Articles


FROM AROUND THE WAR


Comments