About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

2018 U. Chi. L. Rev. Online 1 (2018)

handle is hein.journals/uchidial86 and id is 1 raw text is: Severing Unconstitutional Amendments James Durling and E. Garrett Westt INTRODUCTION Imagine that Congress has passed a comprehensive statutory scheme that includes a tax provision. Suppose further that a later Congress amends the scheme to repeal the tax, but that the repeal renders other parts of the law unconstitutional. Severability doctrine says that courts should prefer partial, rather than facial, invalidation,, but it also says that the touchstone of such a decision is legislative intent.2 And so there's a tension: on the one hand, it seems that Congress wants to curtail the statute's scope and effect by getting rid of the tax; on the other, the Supreme Court disfavors facial challenges. Should the Court strike down the other parts of the scheme, or should it reinstate the tax? On February 26th, twenty states filed a lawsuit against the United States that raises just this question.3 The states allege that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act4 (ACA) is unconstitutional because the statute's individual mandate exceeds Congress's powers under the Commerce and Taxing Clauses. Of course, six years ago the Supreme Court upheld the very same mandate under the Taxing Clause.5 But since that decision, there has been one important revision to the ACA. On December 22, 2017, President Donald Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 20176 (Tax Cuts Act), which eliminates the t Yale Law School, JD Candidates, 2018. Thanks to John Brinkerhoff, Abbe Gluck, Ted Lee, Daryl Levinson, Scott Levy, and Mike Showalter for helpful comments and conversations. Thanks also to the careful editors at the University of Chicago Law Review. All errors are our own. 1 Free Enterprise Fund v Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, 561 US 477, 508 (2010), quoting Brockett u Spokane Arcades, Inc, 472 US 491, 504 (1985). 2 Ayotte u Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, 546 US 320, 330 (2006). 3 See generally Complaint, Texas u United States, Docket No 4:18-cv-00167-O (ND Tex filed Feb 26, 2018) (Complaint). 4 Pub L No 111-148, 124 Stat 119 (2010). 5 National Federation of Independent Business u Sebelius, 567 US 519, 588 (2012). 6 Pub L No 115-97, 131 Stat 2054. 1

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most