A Bloomberg poll of 21 constitutional scholars found that 19 of them believe the individual mandate is constitutional, but only eight said they expected the Supreme Court to rule that way. The headline nicely conveys the reality of the current Court: “Obama Health Law Seen Valid, Scholars Expect Rejection.”
How would you characterize a legal system that knowledgeable observers assume will not follow the law and instead will advance a particular party-faction agenda?
It’s a dubious but familiar proposition that the Constitution means whatever the Supreme Court says it means. But I’ve never before heard that the Constitution means whatever 19 of 21 constitutional law professors say it means! And given the views of the average constitutional law professor, thank God for that!