[BlackElk]

Actually, the next venue will be the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals for the circuit that includes Florida (11th?). If decisions in two or more of the circuit courts of appeal differ significantly, then SCOTUS will likely take jurisdiction to resolve such differences between circuits, especially on an important piece of federal legislation such as Obamacare. There are other cases of a similar natiure with differing results at trial court level: Michigan District Court (and one other?) upheld Obamacare and the mandate and Virginia District Court ruled Obamacare and its mandate unconstitutional on similar reasoning to that of the Florida District Court.

The possible outcomes at SCOTUS are two: sensible agreement with Florida and Virginia District Courts limiting the application of the Commerce Clause so as to outlaw its mandate or drastic and dangerous expansion of Commerce Clause jurisdiction of Congress which would threaten to make Congress's jurisdiction limitless so long as based on Commerce Clause "regulations." This has other implications as well since Congress claimed Commerce Clause jurisdiction in passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and particularly its "public accommodations" sections and many other unrelated pieces of liberal economic and social laws.

[GeronL]

I still don’t think we can put all our eggs in the SCOTUS basket

[gloryblaze]

Thanks. I knew it couldn’t be over yet.

So far, so good, though.

[KansasGirl]

[This has other implications as well since Congress claimed Commerce Clause jurisdiction in passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and particularly its “public accommodations” sections and many other unrelated pieces of liberal economic and social laws]

I thought the courts long ago gave up on consistency.