In a broader sense, they can now force us to pay a tax on a car, or a house, or a candy bar at the local Hatji Mart even though we've chosen not to buy one.
BTW, where does the Constitution give the high court the authority to rewrite law for the purpose making said law constitutional? The Constitution gives congress legislative power, not the court.
The lesson from Marbury v Madison is that the court has the Authority to decide the constitutionality of a law, the lesson from Roberts is that the court has the Responsibility to rewrite bad law to save it.
If Roberts' intention was to avoid accusations of making this an activist court, he couldn't have done more toward that very end.