It is so Constitutional. From the decision:
By regulating the practice of self-insuring for the cost of health care delivery, the minimum coverage provision is facially constitutional under the Commerce Clause for two independent reasons. First, the provision regulates economic activity that Congress had a rational basis to believe has substantial effects on interstate commerce. In addition, Congress had a rational basis to believe that the provision was essential to its larger economic scheme reforming the interstate markets in health care and health insurance.
See also Steve Benen and Adam Serwer.
Except for a few radical right judges around the country, this is obviously perfectly legal. And those judges are trying to impress their masters with their right wing bona fides.
And, since this all aids corporations, the health care ones this time, even the SCOTUS’s ‘Fib Five’ will approve this…
Now, you want Medicare for all? Since it won’t help corporations, the ‘Fib Five’ will make-up all sorts of shit to overturn it.
CUND GULAG- the interesting facet of this split decision is that a republican appointed judge, a Scalia protege, sided with the liberal judge. Everyone expects this will come down the wire with a 5-4 decision with Kennedy casting the deciding vote. I’m not sure, considering how Scalia threw cold water on tenther arguments when meeting with new House members.
This will be decided by the USSC, but I think there will be surprises.
Doug,
Thanks, I shouldn’t be surprised – LG&M has talked about how Scalia is more of a “rogue” than the usual suspects.