LIVE Scotus blog, blogging right here: (LINK)

[Poll_Blind]

HERE

I think there are 3 cases whose opinions will be coming down today.

PB

[CTyankee]

1. goody. We can blog here about blogging there...

funny, that...

[NYC Liberal]

3. And if someone were to take issue with this thread and post about it in Meta...

we could blog about blogging about blogging!

[Poll_Blind]

2. Kick!

PB

[cthulu2016]

4. Stolen Valor act unconstitutional as written (1st amendment)

[Poll_Blind]

5. PDF downloadable here:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-210d4e9.pdf

PB

[Lisa D]

6. Thanks for the link!

Now we wait....

[cthulu2016]

7. The individual mandate survives as a tax.

[Poll_Blind]

8. Amy Howe: The Medicaid provision is limited but not invalidated. nt

PB

[cthulu2016]

9. The Medicaid provision is limited but not invalidated.

[Poll_Blind]

10. 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.

From the ScotusBlog

PB

[coalition_unwilling]

11. The bottom line (from the blog): the entire ACA is upheld,

the entire ACA is upheld, with the exception that the federal government's power to terminate states' Medicaid funds is narrowly read.

[Poll_Blind]

12. Tom: Chief Justice Roberts' vote saved the ACA. nt

PB

[Poll_Blind]

13. Amy Howe: In Plain English: The Affordable Care Act, including its individual mandate...

that virtually all Americans buy health insurance, is constitutional. There were not five votes to uphold it on the ground that Congress could use its power to regulate commerce between the states to require everyone to buy health insurance. However, five Justices agreed that the penalty that someone must pay if he refuses to buy insurance is a kind of tax that Congress can impose using its taxing power. That is all that matters. Because the mandate survives, the Court did not need to decide what other parts of the statute were constitutional, except for a provision that required states to comply with new eligibility requirements for Medicaid or risk losing their funding. On that question, the Court held that the provision is constitutional as long as states would only lose new funds if they didn't comply with the new requirements, rather than all of their funding.

PB