…oddly enough, they’re now noting in an update to their original post that, contra Senator Bill Nelson of Florida*, the lack of a severability clause in Obamacare is both: conspicuous; and a major factor in Judge Vinson’s decision.  Which you already knew, because you read about it first either at MoeLane, or at RedState.  And apparently, so does somebody over at ABC News**.

Still, let me not be unkind about this, given that they actually fixed the mistake and didn’t also try to memory-hole it.  So, let me be among the first to congratulate ABC News for its timely correction to the record; we at Redstate are always happy to help another media outlet correct, and learn from, their mistakes.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

PS: You really need to have Senator Nelson explain that one, Rick Klein.

*Very quick recap: Nelson did an interview in which he claimed that there was a severability clause in Obamacare that would protect the rest of the law, even if the individual mandate was declared unconstitutional.  The problem is, there isn’t such a clause, it was taken out, and anybody who was familiar with either the original law or Judge Vinson of Virginia’s court decision would have known that.

**I’m guessing that it’s probably RedState that they’re reading: after all, we’ve just had it demonstrated that the Center for Disease Control is.