I’m not a lawyer but if recollect, the mandate was the question re constitutionality — could the govt force you to but a product. The mandate has since be repealed, rendering that particular issue moot.
-
-
The point is still the same: The question of constitutionality (the only one that wasn't dismissed out of hand by the courts) was the mandate in the first place. So, getting rid of it, or zeroing it out, doesn't then make the rest unconstitutional.
-
IOW, declaring the mandate constitutional, didn't make the rest of the law constitutional. Declaring that—in practice—the mandate was just a tax, prevent the mandate from being declared unconstitutional & thus taking the rest of the law down w/ it.
-
A duly passed law is presumptively constitutional. Thus there is nothing to sue over unless pleading on a new issue is allowed by the court. Good luck with that.
-
This is exactly the problem. Ken Paxton doesn't believe in a presumption of constitutionality. He wants to bring back the Lochner doctrine, as do many Republicans in Texas.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.