As far as my opinion is concerned, this bullshit quibble you want to cling onto over the "legal definition of standing" is a red herring the court's going to use because it has no truthful argument as to why Congress can legitimately force an individual citizen of any state in the United States to purchase a good or service. Congress is like the mobster dudes rollin' up in your 'hood telling you "buy our protection or else."
no subject