Into his conference call, the CNN producer says (correctly) that the Court has held that the individual mandate cannot be sustained under the Commerce Clause, and (incorrectly) that it therefore ‘looks like’ the mandate has been struck down. The control room asks whether they can ‘go with’ it, and after a pause, he says yes.SCOTUSblog’s Tom Goldstein • Looking back at what caused the mistaken reporting of the Supreme Court’s Affordable Care Act decision, in a minute-by-minute breakdown. In case you need something very epic to read, here you go — Goldstein’s post, which he claims is his first effort at “real journalism,” is 7,000 freaking words long. Or, you know, longer than the usual article we link. (ht Dave Weigel)
The governor has consistently described the mandate as a penalty…[President Obama] insisted publicly and to the members of Congress that the mandate was not a tax. After it passed the Congress, he sent his solicitor general up to court to argue that it was a tax. Now he is back to arguing that it’s not a tax.Romney senior adviser Eric Fehrnstrom • During an interview on MSNBC, saying that President Obama has been the true flip-flopper on how the ACA individual mandate’s penalties should be classified. Following last week’s Supreme Court ruling on the matter, many conservatives have been quick to call the individual mandate a tremendous tax hike, with Rush Limbaugh going so far as to say it will be “the biggest tax increase in the history of the world.” While that’s since been proven untrue, it’s a bit surprising to see the Romney camp bucking the party-line on this issue, especially since they were falling in line just a few days ago. source (via • follow)
Our precedent demonstrates that Congress had the power to impose the exaction in Section 5000A under the taxing power, and that Section 5000A need not be read to do more than impose a tax. This is sufficient to sustain it.The “money quote” from the individual mandate section of the health care decision, according to SCOTUSblog’s Amy Howe.
» So what’s next, anyway? With a question over whether the Supreme Court would decide before the law fully took effect largely off the table, the court will next look into the details of the law. The case, brought by 26 states and small business groups, is highly-anticipated, with many protesters outside the court on Monday. The court will likely make its decision by June, just in time to throw a wrench in the election.