Democrats vowed to appeal a federal judge's ruling

[philibusters]

Without the mandate - I don't think anyone could argue it is constitutional.

I thought the argument was that it was unconstitutional because it had a mandate. Without the mandate what would make it unconstitutional?

 

[GURPS]

See, I don't know the law, but I got the general idea that they were ABLE to make it Constitutional *because* of the fine or "tax".
As in, you either do this behavior or we tax you, just as people are taxed by other behaviors.

But Sam ...

PPACA as passed the 'fine' was detailed as just that a fine or penalty, as written, voted on, and signed by Obama .......


Justice Roberts changed the 'fine' to a 'Tax' and declared PPACA 'legal' .......

 

[SamSpade]

I thought the argument was that it was unconstitutional because it had a mandate. Without the mandate what would make it unconstitutional?

Almost certain it is the reverse - when Roberts deemed the individual mandate as a "tax", and therefore compelling people to purchase health care could be regarded
as a consequence of a tax penalty, that made it constitutional on the basis of that Congress has the right to tax.

The mandate still exists - but - it's zero. No individual mandate, no reason to force people to buy health care.

 

[This_person]

I thought the argument was that it was unconstitutional because it had a mandate. Without the mandate what would make it unconstitutional?

You're reading "mandate" as "the thing that says I must have insurance." Sam is saying "mandate" as "the fine/tax/punishment for not following the requirement to purchase insurance."

 

[SamSpade]

You're reading "mandate" as "the thing that says I must have insurance." Sam is saying "mandate" as "the fine/tax/punishment for not following the requirement to purchase insurance."

Yes, the "individual mandate".