And they trumpeted to anyone who would listen that they repealed the individual mandate — which, for all practical purposes, is precisely what they did. The judge asserted — without any support — that the penalty-free mandate “requires [the plaintiffs] to purchase and maintain certain health-insurance coverage.” But that’s not right. Instead, he turned to the merits and held that the penalty-free mandate is unconstitutional. For O’Connor, then, the penalty-free mandate that remains on the books must be unconstitutional, even though it’s not enforceable. You might have thought that the right remedy would be to invalidate the penalty-free mandate.

Source: Washington Post December 15, 2018 17:31 UTC