Could the Supreme Court rule against Obamacare, while keeping it in place?


As the Supreme Court weighs the constitutionality of the health insurance mandate in President Obama’s landmark law, Jonathan Cohn raises an interesting possible outcome first put forth by law professor Joey Fishkin.

The key is that the mandate to obtain insurance and the penalty for violating it are actually two separate sections in the health care law. “But if the Court determines that Congress has no power to impose the insurance requirement, Fishkin says, it can simply strike the requirement but leave the penalty in place. In other words, the law would no longer tell people to get insurance. Instead, it would merely tell people who don’t have insurance to pay a small fee to the government. On its own, Fishkin says, requiring such payment is a legitimate exercise of congressional taxing power.”

Via The Political Wire.



Previous articleNat'l Democrats add Cliff Stearns to 'House of Scandal'
Next articleObama Campaign looking forward to facing Romney
Peter Schorsch is the President of Extensive Enterprises and is the publisher of some of Florida’s most influential new media websites, including,,, and Sunburn, the morning read of what’s hot in Florida politics. SaintPetersBlog has for three years running been ranked by the Washington Post as the best state-based blog in Florida. In addition to his publishing efforts, Peter is a political consultant to several of the state’s largest governmental affairs and public relations firms. Peter lives in St. Petersburg with his wife, Michelle, and their daughter, Ella.