When I think about NFIB v. Sebelius, my understanding of what Chief Justice Roberts did was to say that in an election year the Justices appointed by one political party should not strike down the signature legislation of the other political party. I have no idea what the Chief Justice thinks that the Chief Justice did two years ago, but how would what I just said apply to King if the decision is 5-4 against the Administration.
Well, 2015 is not an election year, and King would not strike down the Affordable Care Act. But is an adverse ruling tantamount to striking it down given that Congress will not do much in response? I don’t know. I get different views on that from health law experts. Some say this would be crippling, others say not so much. One would think that the briefs will try to convince the Chief one way or the other on this–that matters as much as the technical aspects.
One other note–Paul Krugman’s column in today’s NY Times today on King is the liberal equivalent of a Rush Limbaugh tirade. I don’t have time to go through all of the flaws. I love reading him and think his economic views are spot on, but on this one he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.