[Hop A Long Cassidy]

Didn’t Limbaugh bring up the topic of “severability” clause several days ago?

The point was that Congress didn’t put in the severability clause which stipulated that if any part of the bill is found invalid, the rest of the bill remains in force. Without this clause in the bill, the whole thing would be found void if any part is found unconstitutional.

Has this issue found to be false over the last few days?

[tobyhill]

I’m guessing that SCOTUS will strike down the Individual Mandate but as to not be seen as partisans will allow the law to be severable. I’m also going to guess that the justices will issue a vague warning to the administration that if a lawsuit is brought forward on the religious freedom aspect the courts will rule against the administration.

[Mike Darancette]

The point was that Congress didn’t put in the severability clause which stipulated that if any part of the bill is found invalid, the rest of the bill remains in force. Without this clause in the bill, the whole thing would could be found void if any part is found unconstitutional.