It was a tough day in court for the mandate and the administration. “The justices’ probing questions during the second day of hearings over the constitutionality of Obama’s signature health care overhaul served to jolt the law’s supporters from any certitude that the court would find the requirement to have health insurance does not trample on individual rights,” the Boston Globe writes.
If the health law’s struck down, it’s because, in part, of the 2004 election, the Boston Globe’s Johnson writes. “In 2004, Senator John Kerry was among those presidential candidates who made the Supreme Court’s balance a part of his closing campaign argument. Then-incumbent President George W. Bush did, too. … Bush ended up making his only two court nominations after his reelection victory.”
The New York Daily News: “Obamacare takes Supreme Court beating as justices ask hard questions about requirement to buy insurance.”
Roll Call: “Skeptical questioning of the individual mandate at the heart of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul by the Supreme Court’s conservative bloc, and swing vote Justice Anthony Kennedy in particular, raised the hopes of top Republicans on Tuesday that the court will overturn the law.”
On this third day of Supreme Court arguments, today could be key, The Hill notes, as the court will focus on whether the health law and the individual mandate can be separated. “Severability could be key to the court’s ultimate decision. The debate might see a higher profile after Tuesday’s session, when the court’s potential swing votes indicated that they’re skeptical the insurance mandate is constitutional,” The Hill notes.
“A new Quinnipiac poll finds President Obama leading Mitt Romney in three crucial swing states,” Political Wire writes. “Florida: Obama 49%, Romney 42%; Ohio: Obama 47%, Romney 41%; Pennsylvania: Obama 45%, Romney 42%.”


It's kind of sad to think these legal minds on the Court are simply as partisan as the rest of us. 85% of law scholars polled think the mandate is constitutional, but the Supreme Court will rule 5-4 it's not? Sounds like Bushs' appointments insured the Supreme Court would do the Republican Party's bidding for years to come.
Scalia was ridiculous with his broccoli argument. Being required to acquire health care and being forced to eat broccoli have nothing to do with each other. One is about maintaining life long health and the other is about personal taste. Scalia has no place on that court. He is there to grind his axe.
and yet the Roberts' Court opened the door to corporations and wealthy individuals influencing elections, by allowing them to donate unlimited funds...so, I guess, at some future date, the Broccoli Growers Association could buy politicians who would require broccoli consumption.
Broccoli consumption went up by more than 60% when Bush I told everyone how much he hated it.
That you can't grasp/understand the relevance says it all.
Amy,
You're again attacking the Citizens United ruling. Would you be attacking it had it favored the Progressive ticket?
What's good for the goose, is also good for the gander, right?
If the Obama campaign isn't receiving the $$$$$ he wants for his re-election campaign, is it due to this ruling, or perhaps his policy agenda?
http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2012/03/poll-of-legal-experts-predicts-a-win-for-obamacare.html
Obama considers his inadequate and too expensive health care plan his legacy! What a joke! What will the guy come up with next to waste our time and money!
And really.... How much proof does the country need to be convinced that BO really stinks?
The individual mandate is unconstitutional by any interpretation. That is what the court is going to decide on.... if they rule against it as they should the entire obamacare blunder will fail! We can only pray that the Supreme Court will do the right thing!