Next time, bring accurate content.
Nope, it’s accurate. Now CNN is running a correction.
I think he means “Bring some actual content, not just a cry of First!”
That sort of YouTube juvenile bullshit isn’t how this board works.
Not to mention you’re not even first.
Actually, I thought he meant the individual mandate, not the whole thing.
Very oncomplete story, with no real analysis if the details of the decision, here.
Damn! Beaten to it.
Despite what the commentators on NPR were saying about the “is it a tax?” question (they indicated it was unlikely it would be ruled a tax based on oral arguments), I figured that’s what would happen. Even the solicitor general slipped a few times and called the penalty a tax.
You’re new here, so apparently you’re still figuring things out. We want actual content in posts. Don’t do this again.
twickster, MPSIMS moderator
Damn, CNN, just keep digging your own grave, why don’t ya’?
Here’s the ruling.
Can some legislature-oriented person explain the court’s rationale in layman’s terms?
This is a fantastic victory over the forces of darkness. Or is that dorkness? Either way, I hope Romney chokes so hard on it that he has to be rushed to the emergency room and have his life saved by Obamacare.
Damn you, Obamacare!
I thought maybe he meant that it was a first for a decision of this Supreme Court to actually go the way the Democrats wanted - in which case it was quite clever.
Yes, please. Legalese-to-English translation desperately desired.