SCOTUSblog, the place to find information and analysis of the goings on at the Supreme Court, is hosting a series of symposia on "pipeline" cases--high-profile disputes apt to reach the Supreme Court in the next year or so. In July, the subject was Arizona v. United States, the case about Arizona's controversial immigration law, S.B. 1070. Over the next couple of weeks, the subject is the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act.
You can find the names of the contributors here. (A pretty impressive list, with one notable exception.) And here is the first entry in the series, a piece by current Harvard law professor (and former Solicitor General) Charles Fried. Fried argues that the constitutional attack on the ACA is "pure politics"--that there is no salience to the action/inaction distinction, and that the minimum coverage provision is plainly within Congress's enumerated powers.
