Procrustes Stretched
Dante's Manifesto
- Dec 1, 2008
- 66,149
- 10,523
was not THE argumentYes it did rule it unconstitutional the Commerce Clause was the argument used for the mandate. and Justice Roberts said: the mandate could not be upheld under the Constitution's Commerce Clause.
and earlier you were confusing an appeals court ruling with that of the scotus
go to bed big guy.
quote from Roberts' ruling: "The Government advances two theories for the proposition that Congress had constitutional authority to enact the individual mandate. First the Government argues that Congress had the power to enact the mandate under the Commerce Clause...Second, the Government argues that if the commerce power does not support the mandate, we should nontheless uphold it as an exercise of Congress' power to tax. According to the Government, even if Congress lacks the power to direct individuals to buy insurance, the only effect of the individual mandate is to raise taxes on those who do not do so, and thus the law may be upheld as a tax."
The Commerce Clause was most defiantly used as an argument for the mandate.
from your link you posted.
Roberts, in the opinion, said the mandate could not be upheld under the Constitution's Commerce Clause.
Dope.
and that argument was ruled invalid...the argument was. the second argument was ruled valid. Nowhere did the validity of the first argument cause the mandate to be constitutional or unconstitutional. The case was decided on the second argument, not on the first one. Decided. Get IT yet?
goodnight
you now having bragging rights on being super spanked by Dante
![eusa_angel :eusa_angel: :eusa_angel:](/styles/smilies/eusa_angel.gif)