tick, tick, tick...the countdown to the health care ruling

If the mandate is struck down, I'll be interested in two things.

1. How the majority justifies it in light of precedents, in particular, how Scalia will justify it in light of his own previous opinions.
2. If the Supremes use it as an excuse to strike down the whole law.

I'll also be interested to see how the media reacts. Will they connect this ruling to Bush v. Gore and Citizens United and point out that we're in a new era?

If they uphold the mandate, I'll be interested to see if the Supremes try to set a new, post-Wickard for the commerce clause. (If they vote against the mandate, it'll be pointless to study the new standard, since the new standard will clearly be, whatever Rush Limbaugh wants. See my first point above.)

T Minus 3 Minutes

First reports (CNN & Fox) suggest individual mandate has been ruled unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause. SCOTUS website may be indicating that it survives as a tax.

SCOTUS Blog says the individual mandate has been upheld actually, Roberts joining the liberals.

http://www.scotusblog.com/cover-it-live/

saw it coming from a mile away.

Medicaid provision limited but not invalidated

"Tom: The bottom line: the entire ACA is upheld, with the exception that the federal government's power to terminate states' Medicaid funds is narrowly read"

Yeah, CNN had an early headline that the mandate had been struck down, and for over 5 minutes nobody else had the headline. It was weird.

Still interested in how the votes broke down.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/28/supreme-court-health-care-decision_n_1585131.html

The 5-4 majority opinion, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, upheld the mandate as a tax, although concluded it was not valid as an exercise of Congress' commerce clause power. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined in the majority

5-4. This should provoke right-wing fury, as only Roberts voted with the 4 liberals. I assume he wrote the majority opinion then.

So this belongs in the George W. Bush failure thread?

just a minor wording change

Boom. The right decision and well done to Roberts for being consistent with his general deference to legislative powers. I wonder how hyperbolic Scalia's dissent is going to be I think Scalia sees himself as the next Charles Evans Hughes at this point, though he should remember how Hughes actually fared when he got into politics.

I've gotten multiple emails about the CNN headline, especially since they jumped the gun a bit. Glad to see that in modern times we can still have Dewey defeats Truman moments

I hope he has security with him at all times.