Thank you very much, Brian all right the affordable care act back in the Supreme Court in a case that could put an end to Obamacare itll, be one of justice. Amy Coney Barretts, first major cases thats why the Democrats targeted her as a threat to the health care law. Your honor, I believe your views are sin sheer, but I also sin sure, but I also think you genuinely think the affordable care act is unconstitutional for people who have been up here and their pictures. Is it unreasonable for them to believe the ACA would be overturned? The did you ever write or speak out in defense of the ACA. Did you have a general understanding that one of the presidents campaign promises was to repeal the affordable care act when you were nominated Brian lets bring in the director of the Cato Institutes, Robert a levy center Ilya Shapiro, Yale first off Ilya first

off? Is there a good chance that Obamacare gets destroyed in this session? There is no chance, its very likely e, that the individual mandate gets struck down because theres no longer John Roberts, taxing power argument, but the rest of the law will survive. Theres, not even one vote, let alone four with barretting being the decider Brian. So I guess technically. This is California V, Texas and theyre, saying well John Roberts. In twenty twelve said it exists because the mandate is a tax. Now the president gets rid of the mandate. So if that means you dont is have to buy health care insurance, which had been an average of six hundred and ninety five dollars. So therefore lets try. It again lets try to get rid of it without the mandate and you believe we should focus on severability. Could you put that in Laymans terms, yeah thats, a tan city, legal term, fancy legal term for how much of the rest of the law falls when one part is judged to be constitutionally or legally defective? Now you have to understand this

case is not a redo of that one. From eight years ago, when Roberts ruled, as you described, I was involved. In that case, I argued for the unconstitutionality of the entire law, but this is not a redo, because when, in twenty seventeen Congress zeroed out that tax that penalty, all that e affected was the mandate and Congress could have changed, the rest of the haw could have struck it down, could have changed it in all sorts of ways and it didnt. Therefore, when lawyers, when judges applied this doctrine of severability, how much do you cut out? They look at what Congress dulled and Congress determined not to change the rest of the law, thats, why the mandate will fall, theres, no, more taxing power argument for it, but all or most of the rest will survive. Brian, those pictures of children and adults with chronic disease that sat in their chairs. Instead of the Democrats, that was all a show. The Democrats either didnt

understand the case, or rather their staff, their lawyers didnt, or they were being disingenuous and just politicking ahead of the election, Brian, unbelievable, and when are we going to find out by the end of June thats when the term ends? But this case, as I said, is not that complicated at the end of the day, and we could have a discussion in a few months, Brian its really not your lawyer, but its also not working its, not working for America. I dont want to drill down and actually give people. You know, go beyond the political headlines, but the things got to be fixed. I mean that would be great, but that obviously isnt a job for the Supreme Court thats a job for Congress. Brian! Well, congratulations on your book. We appreciate you joining us today and well. Look forward to finding out if youre, indeed correct, might not even be one vote to.