[Jeff Chandler]

the pessimist in me thinks one of the two will uphold the “intent” of the law.

You may be right, they may not have the guts to rule in a way that allows the Democrats to suffer the consequences of their own duplicity.

If they enacted the law the intention of which was to make every citizen buy a pony, and that law included a penalty for people who refused, and the penalty was that they got a skunk from the government, the court would say the skunk clause could be ignored because the the intent was to provide everyone with a pony.

[Fantasywriter]

Baucus explained legislative intent in 2009. He says the tax credits go only to state exchanges; that, according to his argument/justification of Obamacare, is what makes the law legal:

http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/92861105023/video-sen-max-baucus-says-in-2009-obamacare-tax