guns

I've read the background on that case, and it's all kinds of fucked. Like, the person that had been convicted under the law--and was thus arguing against it--didn't even have representation show up in court, because he'd had to go into hiding. And the person that had convicted him knew that would be the case. Without anyone to even argue his side, it was practically a foregone conclusion that the court was going to reach a decision that the gov't supported.

The tax was intended to be so high that no normal person could afford it. You could apply the same logic to free speech rights, and say that you have to pay a tax of $10,000 is you want to criticize Israel's genocide in Gaza. It's obviously intended to prevent the free exercise of the right.