Brianny Abreu, 6, has her vitals checked at the William F. Ryan Community Health Center in New York, earlier today. Presidential candidates, governors of virtually every state, insurers with billions at stake, companies large and small and countless millions of Americans concerned about their own medical care and how they'll pay for it are awaiting a Supreme Court ruling expected Thursday on whether or not the Affordable Care Act passes the test of constitutionality. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig)

Opinion Editor Kevin Richert/Idaho Statesman writes: "You had to know the U.S. Supreme Court who save the health care ruling for its June encore. So while we policy wonks hold our Bic lighters (or smartphones) aloft, waiting for today’s news, let’s reflect on an already newsy week for the Supremes. News that came on two fronts, and largely at the expense of the states.

• "Monday court’s ruling on the Arizona immigration law, while cluttered, managed to deliver a cogent message. On immigration, the states must defer to the federal government. ...
• "Also on Monday, the court exerted its primacy over campaign finance law, saying its controversial Citizens United ruling, and the new political Wild West of unlimited independent campaign spending, trumps a 100-year-old Montana law banning corporate contributions. The ruling wasn’t just a setback for Montana; 22 attorneys general, including Idaho’s Lawrence Wasden, supported the challenge to Citizens United. More here.

Question: Any predictions re: how the court will rule tomorrow on Obamacare?

---

---