Nonprofit, nonpartisan journalism. Supported by readers.


Supreme Court upholds health care law

Supreme Court upholds health care law

Reporters in D.C. are plowing through handouts of the opinion. Much more analysis will follow. But SCOTUSBLOG, a highly regarded court-watcher, says almost the entire law has been upheld. Chief Justice Roberts voted with the court’s four liberals to create a 5-4 majority in favor of the law. From SCOTUSBLOG:

“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.”

Attached File(s):


You can also learn about all our free newsletter options.

Comments (14)

  1. Submitted by Dennis Tester on 06/28/2012 - 09:24 am.

    This helps Romney

    They turned it into a tax when the law doesn’t call for one. The turnout in November will be huge.

  2. Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 06/28/2012 - 09:28 am.


    I’m surprised and relieved.

  3. Submitted by Robert Gauthier on 06/28/2012 - 09:32 am.

    This explains…..

    This explains the Scalia tantrum on Tuesday, he knew he had basically lost on two major Republican political agendas and had a meltdown like my ten year old. Time for him to go. This was always constitutional, this was an organized attempt by the right to win the election, not actually act like SCOTUS. Democracy saved for another couple of months. Now it is all down to the Koch Brothers to deliver our country to Big Businesss.

  4. Submitted by Neal Rovick on 06/28/2012 - 09:46 am.

    Ramp up the apocalyptic music….

    …behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him….

    Or something like that.

    Ohhh, to be a conservative, this must be the end-times. It’s so exciting.

  5. Submitted by Peder DeFor on 06/28/2012 - 10:03 am.

    It’s a Tax

    It’s kind of striking that after Obama and congressional Dems insisted that the mandate wasn’t a tax, the Supreme Court said it is only constitutional if it is. I’m a little curious how that will be spun out.
    This wasn’t the ruling that I wanted. I think that it gives Congress a presumption of power that it really shouldn’t have. It’s not hard, for instance, to see how some enterprising pro-lifers could seek to limit abortions by employing a tax now. But, c’est la vie. Obviously, there is more work to be done to convince people that we need sharper and more defined limits on gov’t power.

    • Submitted by Paul Brandon on 06/28/2012 - 03:13 pm.


      Team Obama DID think that the health care act could qualify as a tax, and were divided on which approach to take (tax or commerce).
      And as for “sharper and more defined limits on gov’t power” the question on both sides is mostly WHICH powers to limit.

  6. Submitted by Tom Clark on 06/28/2012 - 10:04 am.

    The political bottom line

    is that Obama doesn’t have to worry about Romneycare this fall after all, thanks to Justice Roberts.

  7. Submitted by Paul Brandon on 06/28/2012 - 10:06 am.

    Devils; details

    I haven’t read the whole thing yet (it’s about 190 pages — the ‘executive summary’ is about six, but I’d say that the devil will lurk in the details.
    In particular, ruling that the act falls under taxation rather than commerce may set a limit on future health care related actions.

  8. Submitted by Bill Schletzer on 06/28/2012 - 10:18 am.

    want to be the first to say, “Yay!”.

    Well that vote was a surprise to me. Can’t wait to hear all of the “constitutional conservatives” spout off about a runaway court or something like that. The court just ruled that “Obama care ” is constitutional. Considering how conservative this court has been in recent years, I would have thought the Repubs thought they had this one in the bag. Somewhere I read some comment from a conservative saying yesterday that after the court ruled the health mandate unconstitutional then the Democrats had wasted three years (I believe that was a quote from Romney). Now I wonder if he will say maybe the Repubs have wasted the last three years. Yeah, right.

    Now we just need Tester and Swift to put the correct perspective on this for Minnpost readers.

  9. Submitted by James Hamilton on 06/28/2012 - 10:21 am.

    Synopsis of the decision on the individual mandate

    ROBERTS writes for the majority, upholding the indiviudal mandate in an analysis that will confuse some and anger many. He first holds that the mandate cannot survive under the Commerce Clause but can under the taxation power. However, he first held that it was not a tax for the purposes of a federal law under which one or more of the lawsuits were brought, then held that it had to be considered a tax for constitutional purposes because of the rules governing constitutional challenges to Congressional action. He was joined by GINSBURG, BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN on this part of the decision. SCALIA, KENNEDY, THOMAS, and ALITO, JJ., filed a dissenting opinion. THOMAS, J., filed a dissenting opinion.

  10. Submitted by Reed Carpenter` on 06/28/2012 - 10:46 am.

    A Supreme decision

    One outcome of the Court’s ruling on the Affordable Care Act may be that Democrats will become great defenders of the Cloture Rule in the Senate.

  11. Submitted by Rachel Kahler on 06/28/2012 - 10:48 am.

    Even a broken clock

    is right twice a day. I’m not the only one who has no faith in SCOTUS and its ability to rule with intelligence. Just because they got this right doesn’t mean the branch that was supposed to be the least susceptible to corruption isn’t corrupt. If nothing else, the fact that Obama has been president for the last 4 years has everything to do with this decision.

Leave a Reply