[edpc]

The measure was already invalidated by the courts once before, the House has overwhelmingly passed a bill to repeal it....

Court decision did not issue an injunction and the House measure hasn't been taken up in the Senate.

[Freddd]

They didn’t have to , it’s VOID. It’s unconstitutional, so no need...

[The_Reader_David]

I guess you’ve not read the relevant portion of the decision. Judge Vinson held that as the law had been ruled unconstitutional in toto and was thus void that an injunction would be redundant: there is nothing to enjoin, as the law isn’t a law anymore.

[Mrs. Don-o]

This was dealt with briefly in a section of the article that I had snipped because of space limitations:

"True, Vinson didn't grant an injunction against ObamaCare in his 78-page ruling. But that's because he clearly considers his judgment to be an injunction in itself. He expects the executive branch to comply with the law as he has ruled. "There is no reason to conclude that this presumption should not apply here," he [Vinson] wrote."

The argument is, since Judge Vinson has struck down the law as unconstitutional, he doesn't have to additionally make an injunction saying "Do not proceed with implementing this unlawful statute."