Today, the Wall Street Journal released an article online explaining U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson's ruling that the health care law "must be declared void." The judge's decision is based on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's mandate requiring Americans to buy insurance or pay a fee. The bill, signed in March, was recently repealed by the house by a vote of 245-189. Three Democrats supported the Republican Conference's unanimous vote.
While the repeal vote may have been bipartisan, court decisions on the law have been along party lines. Two Republican appointees to the federal bench have ruled against the law while two Democrats have supported it.
Read an excerpt here:
In his 78-page ruling, Judge Vinson wrote that the entire law must be voided because the individual insurance mandate is "not severable" from the rest of the law. Some laws contain what's known as a severability clause that says the rest of the law stands should a judge strike down a piece of it. But Democrats left it out.
Now even some Democrats who voted for the overhaul are contemplating whether Congress should strip out the so-called individual mandate, a once unthinkable scenario since the provision is seen as the backbone of the law. Since the law requires insurance companies to accept all comers, even people who are already sick, it requires healthy people to buy coverage as well.
Read the rest HERE