Serious Question
 

How is it that simply because one member of the Supreme Court (albeit the Chief Justice) called the mandate penalty a tax it is a tax? This despite that 4 others identified the penalty as an approapriate exercise of the Commerce Clause and the remaining 4 simply said the enitre act is unconstitutional.

Yes, the CJ is first among equals but his vote does not carry any more weight than any other justice; or am I wrong here?

Four other justices joined with Justice Roberts in the determination that the ACA was a valid exercise of Congress' power under its taxing authority. Those four justices also stated their opinion that the ACA could be upheld under the Commerce Clause.

Although in this case, there was agreement on one reason for the decision, that need not occur in every case. There are Supreme Court opinions where there is not a majority in favor of any particular rationale for a decision, but a majority do favor a particular result. That case will result in a plurality decision, concurring decisions, perhaps dissenting opinions, and a majority voting in favor of the judgment.

Regards,

D-Ray

Thanks, D-Ray. I was not aware that the other justices voting to uphold did so under both the Commerce Clause and the Congessional authority to tax.

Thanks, Don! I love having a tame lawyer around. ;)

John

Even house-broken. :cool:

Regards,

D-Ray

If truth is the first casualty during war (or an election), definitions are the second!

speaking of tame...
How do you catch a unique bird? Unique up on it.....
How do you catch a tame bird? The tame way....

yuck yucks