20 States File Suit Against Obamacare, Again: If the Law Was Only Found Constitutional Because It Was Supposedly a "Tax," Is It Still Constitutional, Now That It Contains No Tax Provisions?

I expect that Chief Justice Roberts, the biggest disappointment since Mr. Plinkett's son, will say "If it was born a tax, it remains a tax even after the tax-part is amputated it," or some other bullshit.

Still, I guess hope remains, except, spoiler alert, hope doesn't remain. Chief Justice Roberts did not decide this on the law in the first place -- he decided it on social pressure and politics -- and a change in Obamacare's standing as a tax will therefore not matter to him.





The GOP tax law "eliminated the tax penalty of the ACA, without eliminating the mandate itself. What remains, then, is the individual mandate, without any accompanying exercise of Congress's taxing power, which the Supreme Court already held that Congress has no authority to enact," the complaint states. "Not only is the individual mandate now unlawful, but this core provision is not severable from the rest of the ACA--as four Justices of the Supreme Court already concluded."

It may still be possible to get rid of Obamacare, but it will take an act of political will that I doubt the GOP is capable of. It always seemed unlikely to me the court would take care of this for us (even if it should) -- life just doesn't work like that, at least not for Republicans.

Any victories are hard-won and the result of years of struggle. On the progs get their victories handed to them by robe-wearing Secular Priests.