Nobody knows anything

Especially not about Supreme Court cases.

A Supreme Court dominated by Republican-appointed conservative jurists presides over oral arguments challenging a policy not just favored by liberal Democrats, but arguably central to their identity and their vision for society. And it doesn’t sound like it’s going well - the right-wing justices’ skepticism shines through their pointed questioning, and it is as sure as the night follows the day that the court is going to rule against the liberals, regardless of the social and political turmoil that will result.

I’m not talking about the arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which could lead to the scaling back or even complete overturning of Roe v. Wade. I’m talking about the arguments about the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act in 2012, which many commentators assumed, based on the tenor of the Justices’ questioning, was doomed.

Slate even went all with an “Explainer” piece assuring readers that, yes, you can predict how a SCOTUS case will be decided based on oral arguments:

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments this week on the constitutionality of the 2010 health care reform law. The consensus among the media is that things didn’t go well for President Obama, and some reporters are predicting that the individual mandate will be declared unconstitutional. After making their assessments, court observers usually add the caveat that you can’t reliably predict the outcome of a case based on oral argument. Is that old saw true?

No…

[…]