Federal Judge Rules Insurance Mandate Unconstitutional

Note however, that the judge, Henry E. Hudson, is a well known serious wingnut, and even he did not have the stones to issue an injunction, nor did he rule the rest of the law unconstitutional, and two other Federal District Court judges dismissed the cases pretty much before the ink was dry on those petitions.

Of course, this does mean that it is likely to make it to the Supreme Court, where Justice Roberts is busy trying to recreate the bogus "Freedom of Contract". (See also Schechter).

In any case, the Obama administration's response is predictable:

The administration acknowledges that if the insurance requirement falls before taking effect in 2014, related changes would necessarily collapse with it, most notably provisions that would prevent insurers from denying coverage to those with pre-existing conditions or charging them discriminatory rates.

Once again, the Obama administration is capitulating before the fight has even started.

Let's assume that the Supreme Court rules the mandate unconstitutional.  What happens then is that, if nothing is done, the insurance industry is in risk of collapse in the very short term (less than 18 months).

It's time to ask for single payer, or a public option, not to wring your hands and repeal the bill.

With the threat of a veto, and the ensuing collapse of health insurers across the US, you can get some decent non-insurance company friendly provisions, like the public option and a repeal of ERISA preemption.

But of course, in Obama's world, the predators that are the health insurance industry are "partners" to be protected, not a profit driven source of pain and suffering, so he will go to the mat for them.