[KarlInOhio]

Thanks for answering #20 before I was even able to post it. No implied severability just because Congress usually remembers to include that clause, as the Virginia judge ruled last year.

[KC Burke]

The judge notes the intentional lack of a severibility clause but does not use that aspect of his analysis of the entire issue of severibility. He points out that in defending the individual mandate the defendent claims the law cannot work without it as support for his decision that the whole law then must be ruled invalid.

Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire Act must be declared void.

Seventy Eight pages of wonderfully reasoned and citation filled arguementation that superior courts must first void or obviously and blatently ignore to set this steam engine of socialism back on any track.