Tough medicine

The health care decision may have been controversial, but it could push the Supreme Court out of the political spotlight.

, The National Law Journal


With its landmark decisions on health care and immigration, the Roberts Court extricated itself from one of the most politically charged terms in decades.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at

What's being said

  • Philip M. Kober, JD, MD, PhD

    If anything, this was a purely political decision -- it pushes the court more into the political spotlight rather than out of it. The Obama administration ridiculously continues to try to portray the mandate as not a tax, when that is the only way it can be portrayed. The idea that the mandate has morphed from a penalty into a tax is sheer nonsense. Expanding the taxing power in this fashion 1) creates an entity that our is neither fish nor fowl -- it is clearly not a duty, impost, or excise, nor is it an income tax and seemingly it is not a direct tax either as then the Anti-injunction Act would have applied along with apportionment. This will undoubtedly lead to further litigation, never a good thing. 2) the expansion of the taxing power in this manner allows undisciplined and unlimited use and abuse of this power by Congress to coerce behavior. This is exactly what our Founding Fathers were afraid of in the Stamp Act and other taxes that led them to war against Great Britain in 1775. None of this even gets into one of the most nonsensical and destructive laws in history. Rather than decreasing costs, increasing the number of people with medical coverage, and improving the medical care of the American people, it will drastically increase costs, leave millions still uninsured and virtually destroy the US health care system! How can any of that keep the Supreme Court out of the spotlight?

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202561417510

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.