ObamaCare Watch: What You Need to Know If the Supreme Court Releases Its Health Care Decision Today

At 10:00 a.m. ET this morning, the U.S. Supreme Court will issue one or more decisions on cases heard during its soon-to-be concluded 2011-2012 term. This means that today may very well be the day we learn the fate of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, a.k.a. ObamaCare. In preparation for what is sure to be the most talked-about Supreme Court decision in recent memory, get yourself up-to-speed on the legal and political issues at stake with this selection from Reason's in-depth coverage.

ObamaCare on Trial. The libertarian legal movement threatens Barack Obama's signature law. By Damon Root.

The ObamaCare Tax? Regulation, taxation, and the insurance mandate. By Jacob Sullum.

Wonky Justice. The dubious policy assumptions behind ObamaCare's legal defense. By Peter Suderman.

What's Next if ObamaCare Is Struck Down? The political upside of ditching the health insurance mandate. By Peter Suderman.

Fair-Weather Federalists. Why conservatives and progressives should unite against an overweening national government. By Jacob Sullum.

The 4 Best Legal Arguments Against ObamaCare. Why the president's sweeping health care overhaul should be struck down by the Supreme Court. By Damon Root.

Don’t Buy It. The crazy constitutional logic of the individual insurance mandate. By Jacob Sullum.

The Liberal Legal Bubble. Liberals can't even imagine the opposition's arguments to the individual mandate. By Peter Suderman.

Click below to watch "Wheat, Weed, and ObamaCare: How the Commerce Clause Became All Powerful," the Reason.tv documentary cited on page 47 of U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson's decision striking down the individual mandate.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • ||

    Everyone knows you leave the best for last. The Supremes are just going to flash a little leg today. The full Monty Ruth Bader is coming next week.

  • Pagan Priestess||

    OMG! Where's the brain bleach?! The goggles they do nothink!

  • ||

    The Supremes? That is a singing group.
    The new name for the members of the court, thanks to Hamilton, is 'The Nazgul'.

  • gaijin||

    You Fool. No man can kill me! Die now! :)

  • Torontonian||

    The Nazgul?

    Would someone care to explain that, because it's got me pretty much baffled.

  • gaijin||

    The witch kings from Lord of the Rings.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Only the head Nazgul was called the Witch-King.

    The other 8 were called Associate Witches.

  • Torontonian||

    Nevermind, I googled it.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Just for the record, LOTR is essentially a libertarian tome. It's got all the basic libertarian stuff in there, and I wish it were more widely recognized as such.

    All the good people are good specifically because they refuse to exercise power over others. Gandalf, Aragorn, the Lady of the Wood, they're all offered the ring, and all of them refuse--because there isn't any problem so awful that it would justify using power over others.

    Boromir briefly goes insane, thinking that power like that can be used for good purposes--and it destroys him. The evil people are evil specifically because they want to exercise power over others.

    Tom Bombadil is essentially an anarchist.

  • Pi Guy||

    Starring BHO as Sauron.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Even if they say ObamaCare and the individual mandate are perfectly constitutional, both the individual mandate AND the rest of ObamaCare still completely suck.

  • ||

    And on top of the fact that they suck, they're also completely unconstitutional, so we have nothing to worry about in that department.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Ever heard of the Dred Scott decision?

  • anon||

    The Dean is strong in this one.

  • Ken Shultz||

    If RC made that point before, then RC is a very wise man.

    Ir's the SC's awful, horrible decisions that made all of this possible in the first place. Upholding the mandate wouldn't be the worst decision they ever made.

  • R C Dean||

    Sorry, didn't think of that one. I've been too busy busting on Wickard.

  • ¿Ex Nihilo?||

    RPA, I think you forgot the /sarc tag? Right. Unfortunately, I don't think they read the same constitution we do. The decision will be whatever they want, constitution be damned.

  • mr simple||

    AAAHHHH! The suspense is killing me!

    Or maybe it's the inundation of past articles on the topic. Are you really going to make every other (on average) post about this until (more frequently after) they release their decision?

  • Whiterun Guard||

    THE NAZGUL RIDE AT 10.

  • anon||

    Does that make Obama Sauron?

  • gaijin||

    more likely, Sauroman. A puppet.

  • Ken Shultz||

    One mandate to rule them all
    One mandate to find them
    One mandate to bring them all
    And in the darkness bind them

  • Whiterun Guard||

    "darkness"

    So very racist.

  • gaijin||

    If it is overturned, I look forward to the lamentations of the women, er, I mean the left. If not, I look forward to hearing about 'the horror, the horror' from the right.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Either way, I think it's bad news for Obama.

    If they uphold the mandate, we'll see some of the same forces that drove the Tea Party the first time reinvigorated--release the Kraken!

    If they strike the mandate down, it will confirm a lot of biases out there about how Obama's progressive ideology is hostile to the basic tenants of the Constitution.

    Either way, it's bad for Obama.

    I'd rather have no mandate than a little more impetus against Obama. Obama will be gone in another four years anyway, but the mandate may be with us forever.

  • gaijin||

    Obama will be gone in another four years anyway, but the mandate may be with us forever.

    Excellent point. The mandate is like herpes.

  • R C Dean||

    Obama will be gone in another four years anyway

    Such optimism.

    If the financial collapse comes during his second term, I predict many furrowed brows and chin-stroking editorials about how we shouldn't change horses in mid-crisis, and a push to repeal the Presidential term limits.

  • anon||

    So you're saying Obama would get a another crisis boner that needs to be relieved?

  • ||

    Hey, the video, the screenshot. I have that WestLaw Hornbook on Constitutional Law. Fucking Scalia should purchase it.

  • Whiterun Guard||

    Maybe you should pass a mandate that forces him to buy it.

  • Whiterun Guard||

    I wonder if they will pass a ruling on Neil Armstrong's mailbox in Indian Hills Ohio in '94.

    I predict a 9-0 ruling: Down like a dog at a wrong door SWAT raid.

  • fish||

    Finally a comment that makes sense. Thank you Zantopang.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement