Comment: I agree with you

that if SCOTUS has finally agreed to take this case after years and years of avoiding it that it is not a good sign, seeing that they just ruled it is Constitutional for the government to force you to engage in commerce, whether or not you want to. The other issue you did not address; however, was the actuall issue of what the definition of the word "income" is, specifically as it is used in the 16th Amendment. The problem is, Congress never defined what the term meant in refernce to the Amendment, so SCOTUS ruled that it has to mean whatever it meant at the time the amendment was passed, which is essential a "corporate profit", which is why you did not see the FEDS even attempt to tax individual's wages until around WWII, and there are several SCOTUS cases that differ themselves on the actual nature of the tax, Brushaber saying it is indirect, but others state it is direct. Givemeliberty.org has done a ton of legal research on this topic and documented all of the numerous legal isses with the income tax as it is currently enforced today on people's wages. Bottom line, though, if they are finally agreeing to hear it now, it is not good news because they've already shown a complete unwillingness at this point to uphold the Constitution.