The first question before the Supreme Court this morning was whether or not they could even rule on ObamaCare, because of an old and somewhat obscure law that might stand in the way. Heritage explains:
The 145-year-old Anti-Injunction Act (AIA) provides that courts may not hear most cases to block tax collections until the challengers first pay the tax and seek a refund. The individual mandate in Obamacare doesn’t kick in until 2014, and one court ruled that no one may challenge it until they pay the penalty for not buying insurance in 2015. The United States no longer takes that position; it thinks the AIA doesn’t apply to the mandate penalty because it is not a tax. The challengers argue there are four other reasons why the AIA doesn’t apply.
Given that even the Obama Administration wants them to rule right away, it seems to be an easy decision, and this report seems to indicate that the Justices agree:
The justices said the argument that the court must wait until 2014 seemed to rely on dubious interpretations of their past decisions and of the healthcare law itself.
“Aren’t you trying to rewrite the statute, in a way?” Justice Elena Kagan asked Robert Long, the outside attorney appointed to argue that the court should postpone its decision.
If Justice Kagan’s question is any indication, it looks like we’ll get a decision on ObamaCare later this year.