Someone noted earlier on the thread that perhaps the court anticipated that this would go to SCOTUS for final resolution and therefore did not want to impede the ongoing preparations to implement the bill. If I were a state, I would refuse to implement anything until this is ruled on by SCOTUS.
Weird..it was a 2-1 decision..Two judges in the affirmative were Democrat appointees..the dissenting, a Republican appointment...world is indeed screw today..
Perhaps there was another motivation. Since Judge Vinson's ruling eliminated the entire law, the States had to wait for Obama to appeal. I read the Florida case many moons ago. The States were claiming the law was unconstitional on 10th Amendment issues and the individual mandate. Perhaps by striking down only the individual mandate, the appeals court gives the States the ability to appeal the 10th Amendment issues without having to wait for Obama. Is that possible? Not a legal scholar here. Any input from an attorney would be appreciated.