I don't understand the logic of referring to a Supreme Court case that broke out part of the ACA as evidence that the ACA cannot be taken piecewise. Any number of laws have had pieces removed by the USSC without being overturned in toto.
Nototiously, Taft-Hartley has had most of its pro-union pieces gutted in court or in legislation, while the act as a whole stays in effect.
I don't understand the logic of referring to a Supreme Court case that broke out part of the ACA as evidence that the ACA cannot be taken piecewise. Any number of laws have had pieces removed by the USSC without being overturned in toto.
ReplyDeleteNototiously, Taft-Hartley has had most of its pro-union pieces gutted in court or in legislation, while the act as a whole stays in effect.
I don't understand either, though I haven't made much of an effort.
ReplyDelete