First, though, a few of my thoughts. Most of the articles I read focused on one of two issues: the effects this law will have as the remainder of its provisions are implemented over the next few years (in my view, the short-term issues) or the effect that Chief Justice Roberts' opinion will have on future legislation and judicial decisions (in my view, the long-term issues). While my initial reaction to the news yesterday was one of disappointment (with regard to the short-term issues), after all my reading over the last two days, I am encouraged by the potential benefits of this ruling on those long term issues. I also have a newfound appreciation for how difficult it must be to be a federal judge, let alone on the highest court. In any case, while I am sure the near future will see much legislative activity on the issue of health care reform, I suspect the history books will mark this year as important in the development of the constitutional limits of the federal government - one way or another.
And now, for my selected articles, which I have grouped by publication, rather than my usual method of date. In addition to articles addressing the two issues I mentioned above, I am also including a few on related subjects (such as the important but as yet unresolved religious freedom question).
Editorial: "Judicial Restraint: John Roberts' Deft Decision on Obamacare"
Editorial: "Unfinished Business: Financing Medicaid's Expansion in Doubt"
Peter Pitts: "Survival of the Fittest: The Evolution of Healthcare"
Alex Murashko: "Obamacare: HHS Mandate Redefines Religion, Say Christian Legal Experts"
Katelyn Beaty: "Faith Healing: How Local Churches Are Stepping Into Healthcare's Gaps" [from This is Our City]
"Obamacare and the Supreme Court: A Clean Bill of Health"
"Obamacare and the Supreme Court: John Roberts' Art of War"
Chuck Donovan: "Repealing Obamacare to Preserve Civil Society"
James C. Capretta and Robert E. Moffit: "How to Replace Obamacare" [this is an older article I came across and found interesting, though lengthly]
The New York Times
Editorial: "A Moderate Ruling with Risks Ahead"