Much in the same way we would criticize liberals for judicial activism, it doesn't matter what a sane, rational person thinks of a law - the Supreme Court should be deciding if this law is constitutional or not.
My thought is that the individual mandate will be struck down, but Kennedy not having the cajones to invalidate the whole law based on inseverability.
Agreed. sane, rational = constitutional.
I beg to differ.
The basic reason given for the appeal IS the Serverability issue.
The rest of it (including individual mandate) is secondary. For now.
JMHO, this is going to turn into less of a question of "Is Justice Kennedy going to have a bad hair day" than "Does the ENTIRE court believe in the Constitution and the Rule of Law", because if that atrocious mess gets upheld in any part, the people who voted for it can credit themselves with the destruction of their jobs along with the very things they swore to uphold and defend.
Somebody's just drawn a line in the sand, not just filed an appeal.
No wiggle room, no BS, no more half measures. Either the Law means something or it doesn't.