I found this old post while looking something else up. At the time I thought it'd be a good precedent to use in arguing about an NFA repeal, but now I'm thinking if SCOTUS ever hears the matter again, perhaps this would be persuasive regarding Obamacare.
The gist is the court opined that a tax whose primary or perhaps even strongly secondary purposes was regulation was doomed to fail a constitutional challenge, if the taxed activity could not be otherwise regulated under the Constitution.
Course I am merely a humble non-lawyer, and I've no idea if this was brought up before, or if it'd be persuasive to SCOTUS now. It is interesting though, isn't it?
Posted by Publicola at January 29, 2013 09:10 AM | TrackBack