Just to clarify; does this bill contain the severability clause?
And if not, how could SCOTUS consider the bill as if the severability clause was there?
My recollection is that it originally contained the severability clause, but Congress deleted it prior to passing - intentionally, because the bill won’t work without it.
But I’ve slept a few nights since then, so my memory may be faulty.
If the USSC looks at Congress’ intent, which can be deduced based on these actions, then if the mandate is struck, the rest of the act should also be struck.
Because they can rule whatever they like! Isn't that awesome? Nine people decide when our rights must be respected and when not. Actually, it's often just one person: "Swinger" Kennedy.