# SCOTUS's decision on The Health Care Law 6/28/12

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotuss-decision-on-the-health-care-law-6-28-12/626499>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [June 27, 2012, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotuss-decision-on-the-health-care-law-6-28-12/626499 "2012-06-27T19:56:28Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 150

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\
**Post date:** [June 28, 2012, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotuss-decision-on-the-health-care-law-6-28-12/626499/150 "2012-06-28T15:14:48Z")

</div>

> [@Bricker](#):
>
> Did not see this coming. Apparently it’s not constitutional as an exercise of Congress’ Commerce Clause powers, but it is as an exercise of Congress’ taxation powers.
> 
> I guess Justice Bricker would have concurred in the result.

As would Justice Bright. In fact…

> [@Justices signal possible trouble for health insurance mandate](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justices-signal-possible-trouble-for-health-insurance-mandate/616961/201):
>
> [They don’t have to analyze it under the ICC, though. Regardless of how it was framed, the penalty underlying the individual mandate is either a tax or it isn’t. If it’s a tax, it falls under the taxing and spending power regardless of what constitutional provision Congress overtly relied on in enacting it.
> 
> From [URL=“[http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/supreme\_court\_preview/briefs/11-398\_petitioner.authcheckdam.pdf](http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/supreme_court_preview/briefs/11-398_petitioner.authcheckdam.pdf)”]the Petitioners’ (Government’s) SCOTUS brief on the individual mandate (the “minimum coverage” provision)]([http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14924561&postcount=200](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14924561&postcount=200)):
> 
> > [@](#):
> >
> > In “passing on the constitutionality of a tax law,” a court is “concerned only with its practical operation, not its definition or the precise form of descriptive words which may be applied to it.” Nelson v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 312 U.S. 359, 363 (1941).

---

_[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotuss-decision-on-the-health-care-law-6-28-12/626499)._