no, the order sets forth exactly what is to be argued, constitutionality is what will be decided.
I agreed with you as to what would be argued. My point was that the Court is not bound to decide the underlying issue, even if it hears argument on the merits. Here are the orders. Notice the argument that suit is barred by the AIA ...
11-393 ) NAT. FED'N INDEP. BUSINESS V. SEBELIUS, SEC. OF H&HS, ET AL.
)
11-400 ) FLORIDA, ET AL. V. DEPT. OF H&HS, ET AL.
The petition for a writ of certiorari in No. 11-393 is
granted. The petition for a writ of certiorari in No. 11-400 is
granted limited to the issue of severability presented by
Question 3 of the petition. The cases are consolidated and a
total of 90 minutes is allotted for oral argument.
11-398 DEPT. OF H&HS, ET AL. V. FLORIDA, ET AL.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. In
addition to Question 1 presented by the petition, the parties
are directed to brief and argue the following question:
"Whether the suit brought by respondents to challenge the
minimum coverage provision of the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act is barred by the Anti-Injunction Act,
26 U.S.C. AS:7421(a)." A total of two hours is allotted for oral
argument on Question 1. One hour is allotted for oral argument
on the additional question.
11-400 FLORIDA, ET AL. V. DEPT. OF H&HS, ET AL.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted limited to
Question 1 presented by the petition.