Indeed. Without the individual mandate, the majority will opt not to buy the over-priced, high-deductible coverage. The insurers will collapse along with the exchanges. I hope there’s a plan B to save the industry.
I don’t think the employer mandate has been struck down. If they could get rid of the employer mandate we would see an even higher employment rate and more importantly, wage growth. Why is congress waiting?
Nice how he waited to end to acknowledge this was Cuccinelli’s old play.
Compelling reading — four years ago.
No, removing the tax penalty will not invalidate the whole law.
Having a unified Republican government did not invalidate the tax this year, who on earth is so naive as to think the courts are going to save us now?
Roberts will twist himself into an eleven-dimensional pretzel to find a shadow of a penumbra that will justify him saving Ocare again.
The government does not have the right to force anyone to buy something.
I don’t believe there is such a thing as retroactive unconstitutionality. The law was ruled constitutional based on the tax laws in effect at the time. Now that those laws have been changed it doesn’t invalidate the laws passed that used them like health care.
This writer is stretching things too far. Not that I don’t wish it to be true.
WHAT?!! It was NEVER constitutional!
Logic killing stupidity by the day life is good.
Look. Understand something.
Everything Obama did is legal and Constitutional, because we learned in 2008 that Presidents are omnipotent and don’t have to abide by the Constitution.
And, everything Trump does is illegal and impeachable, because we learned in 2012 that Presidents are powerless and their actions violate unwritten parts of the Constitution.
Learn it. Live it. Love it.
It never was.
bump
When the Supreme Court originally ruled, there was speculation that Roberts was being blackmailed over irregularities in the adoption of his two kids. In 2019, both kids will have turned 18, rendering moot any questions about their adoption.
“If the individual mandate is only constitutional because it’s a tax, then the removal of the penalty from the law should gut the mandate of its constitutionality. And that’s precisely what happened in December, when Congress passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.”
I guess I don’t get it. So the mandate is still in place, although it has no teeth. So if there is no way to enforce this mandate, does it really matter if it’s constitutional or not? I imagine the liberal justices would just say the mandate is ineffective so let’s pretend it’s not even there. And Roberts. He went out of his way to make the law constitutional last time, this one seems a bit easier for him.