Healthcare in the judicial clouds

“For now, the disparity in legal opinions is good news for the White House. With no overwhelming legal consensus, the law could take significantly more time to arrive before the Supreme Court, which is all but guaranteed to eventually hear a challenge to it.

But there's more good news for the administration. The span of legal arguments is not as broad as the law's critics have suggested. In his ruling, Judge Hudson only called into question the individual mandate. He didn’t nix the federal infrastructure that is being built to enforce it, starting in 2014. Nor did he accede to petitioners’ demands that the entire law be labeled unconstitutional. It’s true that the law could be undercut without the mandate, but Hudson y stayed away from the remainder of the measure, most parts of which, including the extension of benefits for dependents and the guarantee of coverage, are quite popular.

Still, the legal road ahead remains uncertain. White House officials continue to defer questions about the impending legal fight to the Department of Justice, which oversees all federal compliance. But Supreme Court watchers are already beginning to muse about how the panel will split. The ultimate decision won’t be made by President Obama or by any conservative leader. It will be made; it appears, by Justice Anthony Kennedy.”