there is a vast difference between regulating somebody who is voluntarily coming into congress and telling someone that they have no choice to enter the stream of congress. as to the coercion argument, the states are equally fundamental because we have a system where the federal government is limited in enumerated powers. there are certain things you can do states to do but it can t give directly. it is absolutely vital to make sure that there is a difference between voluntary spending and coercive legislation. that is exactly what is at stake here. whether this legislation is coercive. does it seem like justices were leaning toward striking down the individual mandate. how did you read the justices. i read the justices of as testing the limits on all sides of the case. i cannot say whether they were leaning this way or that way. they are ugly trying to get to the right answer in these cases. all the justices were engaged and that is a difficult question to answer. wh