I forlængelse af forrige blogindlæg er jeg blevet opmærksom på, at Ilya Somin, har lavet en udførlig og ganske link-holdig tekst, om hyppigt bruge ikke-juridiske argumenter for, at højesteret skal opretholde forsikringspligten i ACA/ObamaCare. Selv siger han (indledende) om dem:

Even if correct, none of these arguments actually prove that the Court should uphold the mandate as a legal matter. A decision that is perceived as “illegitimate,” partisan, and unconservative can still be legally correct. Conversely, one that is widely accepted, enjoys bipartisan support, and is consistent with conservatism can still be wrong…