There are, of course,legal questions.As far as I can tell, precedents seem to favor Congress's power to impose the individual mandate and to expand Medicaid.
But, as we all know, these matters are usually settled, not by law, but by political and cultural ideology. That's certainly the case with the Roberts court.
Apparently, Scalia has decided an analogous case using a gnerous application of the commerce clause, But one has only to check out Tough Tony's bizarre quotes on the execrable Citizens United decision to know that Scalia's alleged originalism barely veils his Papist mindset.
Clarence Thomas won't speak during this weeks arguments because he never does. But, come June, Consistent Clarence will take his usual narrow view of what constitutes interstate commerce. His rabid Tea Party activist wife is irrelevant, although she may give him a little more action if Obamacare falls.