It bothers me that the justices seeming to favor the Medical legislation are Democrats, while those opposing are Republicans. This should not be a political decision. Yet the discussion so far indicates that the final decision will be based on politics rather than interpretation of the legislation & the constitution. There is only one short phrase in the constitution. Something like: "The Federal government has the right to regulate interstate commerce." As far as I know the original intent was primarily to prevent states from enacting tariffs against each other and to allow products produced in one state to be sold in another. It would obviously be a mess if New York wanted to favor products made in New York by imposing tariffs on the same products made in New Jersey or worse yet, not allowing the NJ products to be transported across the state line. That phrase has been used to justify incredible regulatory powers. It seems to me that for circa 100 years or more, the supreme court (& lesser coursts) make a decision based on their own subjective POV & then contrive some interpretation of law & the constituition to justify the what they decided before actually analyzing the issues. BTW: While I am in favor of women making their own decisions about abortion, I consider the “Right of privacy” argument used as ridiculous. Actually, it seems like a weird contrived argument by those in favor of the Roe/Wade decision.