Decoding the Supreme Court: Five things to look for in immigration, ObamaCare rulings

As early as today, the U.S. Supreme Court will render its verdicts on two of the most politically divisive issues of the past decade, immigration and health care.

As the justices announce the fate of Arizona’s tough immigration enforcement law and the sweeping health care reform law, political and legal analysts will try to determine the impact of the rulings on Barack Obama’s presidency, enforcement of immigration laws and the one-sixth of the U.S. economy connected to health and medicine.

Here are five things to look for that will give you quick answers to the significance of the decisions:

1 How narrow or sweeping are the decisions?

The justices have the option of deciding either case along narrow grounds or could draw sweeping conclusions.

In the Arizona case, the justices could simply say that Arizona has a right to enforce immigration laws and return the case to lower courts for further review. Or they could uphold — or strike down — the controversial law known as SB 1070.

A tie vote is also possible on the Arizona law because Justice Elena Kagan is not taking part in the immigration case because she, as U.S. Solicitor General, helped to formulate Obama administration legal strategy. If the court deadlocks 4-4, the lower court ruling would be upheld — striking down four key provisions of the law — but no national precedent would be set.

On health care, the high court could rule narrowly on the question of whether Americans can be required to buy insurance or pay a fine. They also could invalidate the entire law. Or approve it.

Nan Aron, president of the liberal Alliance for Justice, says she is watching to see “how big of a bite do the justices take out of the (Constitution’s) Commerce Clause,” which allows the federal government to regulate interstate commerce and has been defined expansively since New Deal days. If the health care case is used to rein in the Commerce Clause, “what are the effects of the case beyond health care?” she asks.

2 Did the court decide along party lines?

If the court’s votes follow the party of the president who appointed each justice, the Arizona law will be upheld and the health care reform law will be struck down.

There are five Republican-named justices and four Democrats. Justice Anthony Kennedy, picked by President Ronald Reagan, is considered the swing vote on the court. He will have to vote with Democrats for President Obama to have any chance of prevailing.

“If Justice Kennedy is satisfied that the unique problem of ensuring health care for all authorizes Congress to act, the law will be upheld,” said Dallas attorney Richard B. Roper. “If not, the individual mandate will fall.”

3 Can one side win a solid majority in either case?

In some cases, there is no single majority opinion because no viewpoint commands the support of five justices. A fractured majority with several different opinions means that the decision will have less impact on the country.

Legal experts who have been watching the Arizona case say there is a strong possibility that the decision will be muddled.

“Whatever the outcome, the decision likely will spawn additional litigation as the lower courts sort what the court meant in its ruling,” said Roper, of the Thompson & Knight law firm.

4 How deeply divided is the court?

Because of the policy and political implications of the decisions, advocates on both sides of both issues are highly charged.

Will the justices be equally polarized?

“I’m looking to the rhetoric” in the opinions, said Ed Whelan, president of the conservative Ethics and Public Policy Center. “How strident are the opinions? How divisive are they?”

One way to gauge the depth of anger among justices is to see if a justice reads his or her dissenting opinion from the bench in the ornate Supreme Court chamber. Justice Stephen Breyer did just that on Thursday in a labor-law case.

If Justice Antonin Scalia is reading a stinging dissent, it would illustrate the depth of anger among conservatives at Justice Kennedy for siding with the Democrats.

If Justice Breyer is once again reading a dissent, it tells you that the court’s liberal block is steamed.

5 What is the philosophical core of Chief Justice John Roberts?

As Whelan, a former law clerk to Justice Antonin Scalia and law school classmate of Justice Kagan, points out, chief justices often “take the most significant cases for themselves” to write the majority opinion.

If Justice Roberts does that, Americans could get a glimpse at the direction in which Roberts hopes to steer the high court.

“We’ll learn a lot about his view of the Constitution from the rulings,” Whelan said.

Richard Dunham