Ypres, Human Rights Day, and Iran's Martyrs: Why Memory is a Moral Duty
Notice Where and When This CNN Panel on Immigration Fell Apart
I’m A Racist, He’s A Racist, She’s A Racist, Wouldn’t You Like To...
Who Are We in Their Presence?
A Quick Bible Study Vol. 298: It’s ‘Messiah’ Time Again
Why Leftist Film Societies Cancelled Nuremburg
The Season Was Made for Remembering
America’s Foster Care Crisis Demands a Return to Faith, Family, and Community
A Call to Remember the Persecuted Christians
Restoring a Generation’s Love for Faith and Country
Hollywood Director Convicted of Blowing $11M Meant for Sci-Fi Show on Stocks and...
Tim Walz Downplays $1 Billion Fraud Scandal
13-Year-Old Arrested at Minnesta School With 1,500 Suspected Fentanyl Pills
ISIS Gunman Kills 2 US Soldiers, 1 US Interpreter in Syria; 3 Others...
North Carolina Worker Pleads Guilty to Stealing $102K in Food Benefits
Tipsheet

Severability Applied Correctly

To add to Guy's analysis below, the proper application of severability principles leads to an even more sweeping victory in Florida today than that in Virginia, where the ObamaCare individual mandate was also ruled unconstitutional.   Here, Judge Vinson was absolutely correct in ruling that the individual mandate could not be severed from the rest of the ObamaCare legislation.
Advertisement

What's interesting is that the Virginia judge, the Hon. Henry Hudson declined to apply severability principles.  To justify that decision, that judge had cited a 2010 Supreme Court case where part of the law was invalidated but the rest retained (Free Enterprise Fund vs. PCAOB).  The big difference?  In that case, the law was passed by a nearly unanimous Congress -- and it would have passed even without the provision being challenged.

Here, obviously, that's not the case.  The individual mandate was at the heart of ObamaCare -- the law doesn't work without it.

Onward to the Supremes.

Update: It's also worth noting that Judge Vinson didn't buy the states' arguments about Medicare -- in short, he found under existing precedent that it's permissible for the federal government to condition continued receipt of Medicaid funds on their acceptance of the rest of the ObamaCare regime.

Thus, it's clear -- as many already expected -- that the individual mandate/Commerce Clause issue is the strongest legal argument ObamaCare opponents have.


Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement