Prediction: The Supreme Court, 7-2 (or maybe 6-3), will find PPACA, including the individual mandate, to be constitutional
And find is perhaps the operative word here, because they're each going to have to come up with their own (probably wildly diverging) reasons for supporting it.
My impression tallies with this one, the justices in order from most conservative to less conservative are: Thomas, Scalia, Roberts, Alito, Kennedy, Breyer, Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsberg.
The "Four Liberals" - Breyer, Kagan, Sotomayor, and Ginsberg - will see that the PPACA, despite enriching Big Pharma, Big Hospitalization and Big Insurance, will actually help some people, possibly as many as a few million people. What liberal worth their weight in salt wouldn't want that? Also, they're all smart people and understand that the idea of insurance is to spread the risk across the broadest pool possible and therefore
forcing everyone to pay through the nose for a crappy and fraudulent financial "product" keeping the individual mandate intact is essential.
Score: 4 for
Clarence Thomas is the misanthrope's misanthrope and this law will, in spite of all its flaws, help some people, possibly as many as a few million people. Clarence Thomas will find a way to be against this law on that reason alone, though if he's asked to give his reasoning he's awfully unlikely to just come right out and say I'm voting to strike down this law because I'm a fucking misanthrope, you idiot.
Score: 4 for, 1 against
Scalia is a contrarian and a limelight hog. Also a Federalist. He'll be against the law because, you know, Federalism. The fact that the states have a lot (a LOT) of leeway in setting up their exchanges, including that favorite shibboleth of the right, selling insurance across state lines, is not going to sway him. Besides, Obama is a Kenyan Muslim Socialist and The Right must be seen to be obstructing him at every turn; can't have just one lone, possibly rogue, obstructionist on The Supreme Court, the opposition has got to look more coordinated than that.
Score: 4 for, 2 against
Alito and Roberts, while carefully burnishing their "conservative" cred, are basically creatures of Big Business. Various sectors of Big Business are at loggerheads over who's going to get how much out of this law, but in the main, Big Business is going to get Big Buck$ if the law is upheld in its entirety. Alito and Roberts will find some kind of Tea Party-acceptable justification for accidentally appearing to be on the same side as the Kenyan Muslim Socialist.
Score: 6 for, 2 against
I think Kennedy's questioning was not liberty over broccoli! so much as it was forcing everyone to buy broccoli is over the top, so give me a better reason to force people to buy a crappy, fraudulent insurance "product." Count me among those who believe that Kennedy is going to throw individual liberty to the wind and go all acceptance of a practical post-New Deal conception of the federal power to regulate a national economy. Also, while he's a pretty smart dude, he may even fall into the insurance = health care = liberty trap.
Score: 7 for, 2 against
On the other hand, Kennedy may actually favor individual liberty over broccoli.
Score, in an alternate reality: 6 for, 3 against
Ginsberg is smart, and in some ways truly radical, and Sotomayor, the wise Latina, may wise up in time, and both of these women may go full-bore liberal and declare only Medicare and Medicaid and a National Health Service to be constitutional.
Score, in Dreamland: 4 for, 5 against