Is it unconstitutional to require you to buy auto ins, or a car, or a phone, or sell to x? no.

[Leopolds Ghost]

Kelo and a host of other SCOTUS rulings cementing corporate rule saw to that. So, naturally, people who are used to the current system and see no injustice in it (being not adversely affected by majoritarian requirements that, being in the majority who would already use such services, are not affected by mandates to do so) see no problem declaring further instances of mercantilism constitutional.

Now you get your yellow ticket of leave.

The same argument was used to advance universal citizen ID, and eminent domain for private purposes.

Interestingly, no one makes the opposite argument, to support, say, the existence of public housing
or other public infrastructure or public safety net. The constitution, it is assumed, is a malleable
document when it comes to getting rid of those things (privatizing them and replacing them with
individual mandates, which Mitt Romney called the aim of the Republican economy.)

Within a few years, this host of precedent will be used to force Americans to purchase, say, cable
broadband in a second Telecom act that the NYT claims will "make broadband the communications medium
of choice, gradually eliminating telephone and broadcast television service." Because no one should
have to live without a universal set-top box, not when their children's learning tools are on it.