The U.S. Supreme Court will decide next year whether the “individual mandate” under 2010’s federal health reform law is constitutional (and if not, whether the remainder of the law must also be thrown out). Although the date for arguments on these matters has not been set, last week the Court issued its briefing schedule on the issues to be argued.
The briefing schedule sets the deadlines by which the parties involved in the pending challenge to the law must submit their written arguments to the Court. Thus, the briefing schedule gives us a clue as to the timing of the ensuing oral arguments—wherethe parties literally argue their positions in the presence of, and take questions from, the Court’s justices. The Court tends to issue its decisions within weeks after oral arguments, so the briefing schedule also supplies some clues as to the timing of the Court’s decision.
With regard to the issue of the individual mandate’s constitutionality, the Court wants the Obama Administration’s brief (the Administration will argue that the mandate is constitutional) by January 6, and the brief of those opposed to the mandate by February 6. The Administration’s reply brief, which will challenge the opponents’ written arguments, is due March 7.
There is a similar briefing schedule on the question of whether, if the mandate is unconstitutional, the entire law must also be tossed aside.
This all suggests oral arguments may be heard as early as April, with a decision to follow by early to mid-summer. The Court has set aside at least five hours for oral arguments, well in excess of the typical hour reserved for arguments. This reflects, in part, that the Court is considering several weighty issues at once (the constitutionality of the individual mandate, its severability from the rest of the law, and some procedural issues), but also reflects the significance of those issues.