Can the President still say that the mandate is not a "tax"??

[bigtree]

90. so the Justices that didn't recognize the tax argument were just swiss cheese?

The tax element was just a base justification and validation of Congress' authority. It doesn't make it an overriding element of the legislation just because some critics harped on it. Good for the lawyer using their overemphasis on the tax point to rope the Court in. There is certainly other justification to let it stand, outside of pointing to their tax authority, but it was a clever and lawyerly tactic to make certain they used EVERYTHING in their defense available.

I think that, outside of these few exchanges, Verelli made his case on other justifications, but, if if took pointing to even the opposition's bleating about the tax element to pass the thing, so be it. It doesn't alter the president's central arguments at all; outside of the weak argument that it's taxing effect would fall on that 2% or so who either opt to pay the fine or failed to obtain coverage for other reasons.