SCOTUSblog live blog of opinions June 28, 2012

12:51

Matt:  Pelosi has finished speaking, Speaker John Boehner is expected to hold a press conference at 1:15EST.

12:52

Matt:  Boehner had released this statement following the decision: “The president’s health care law is hurting our economy by driving up health costs and making it harder for small businesses to hire. Today’s ruling underscores the urgency of repealing this harmful law in its entirety. What Americans want is a common-sense, step-by-step approach to health care reform that will protect Americans’ access to the care they need, from the doctor they choose, at a lower cost. Republicans stand ready to work with a president who will listen to the people and will not repeat the mistakes that gave our country ObamaCare.” http://www.speaker.gov/press-release/speaker-boehner-statement-supreme-court-s-health-care-ruling

12:55

Matt:  Allen McDuffee at the Washington Post discusses various think tanks' responses to the decision: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/think-tanked/post/supreme-court-upholds-health-care-law-think-tanks-react-to-obamacare-decision/2012/06/28/gJQAGecC9V_blog.html

12:57

Kali:  Randy Barnett has this post for the blog: http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/06/a-weird-victory-for-federalism/

12:57

Matt:  Fox News: Lawmakers react to Supreme Court decision upholding Obama health care law. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/28/lawmakers-react-to-supreme-court-decision-upholding-obama-health-care-law/

12:57

Kali:  Randy concludes, "Academics are sure to react to today’s decision by declaring the New Federalism dead, but they would be wrong to do so. The Founder’s scheme of limited and enumerated powers has survived to fight another day."

1:01	Matt:  For those requesting a link to the opinion itself again: http://www2.bloomberglaw.com/public/document/Natl_Federation_of_Independent_Business_v_Sebelius_No_11393_US_Ju. It's 193 pages. Better get started!

1:03	Matt:  Apparently that link isn't working for everybody, here is another: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-393c3a2.pdf

1:04	Matt:  Tom is on Fox News right now.

1:06	Matt:  Tom: The decision won't have a big effect on Congress's ability to regulate.

1:08	Matt:  Tom: The Medicaid part of the decision could be the one to have the most significant effect on clipping Congress's wings. (before he was referring to the Commerce Cause aspect of the decision)

1:09	Matt:  Tom: It will be hard not just this year but for the next 10 years to criticize the John Roberts Supreme Court and the conservative direction that it is headed in as partisan.

1:11	Matt:  Tom: It probably gives the public more faith in the result that a conservative justice can find a way to uphold the Democratic president's signature accomplishment.

1:11	Matt:  Tom: SCOTUSBlog just clipped over 3 million hits!

1:11	Kali:  Kevin has a short post here at the blog saying that "the medicaid ruling may have broad implications." http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/06/medicare-holding-may-have-broad-implications/

1:14

Matt:  David Bernstein at Volokh: "Did Roberts originally vote to invalidate the mandate on commerce clause grounds, and to invalidate the Medicaid expansion, and then decide later to accept the tax argument and essentially rewrite the Medicaid expansion.. to preserve it?" www.volokh.com/2012/06/28/was-scalias-dissent-originally-a-majority-opinion/ (Thanks to Henry for the link)

1:16	Matt:  We are expecting Speaker Boehner's reaction to the decision soon.

1:16	Kali:  The Times is posting continuous coverage, photos, quotes etc.: http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/live-coverage/scotus-healthcare#sha=0577546ab

1:18

Kali:  At Bloomberg View, Noah Feldman says the Court took the cautious route by upholding the mandate but sent "a direct message to Democratic politicians who refused to call the mandate a tax: You should have told us the truth in the first place." http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-28/roberts-chooses-restraint-over-history-on-obamacare.html

1:21

Kali: 

Feldman also writes, "Roberts knew the consequences of striking down the individual mandate: He would have been attacked by the president and the news media as the chief of the most activist conservative court since the 1930s. For “the Roberts Court” to become a title of infamy would have been a sadly negative culmination of a highly successful career."