Winner of wonkiest protester: the guy walking around with a "Restore Glass Seagall" sign around his neck. #scotus

The other outsanding case is First American Financial v. Edwards. It's really about standing, about the the right to sue under the U.S. fair houseing law.

Here's some background on First American: This hasn’t been a particularly blockbuster term for business cases but First American v. Edwards could be a sleeper. On its face, the case asks whether an Ohio homeowner can sue her title insurance company for allegedly receiving kickbacks under the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, which seems like an obscure question. But the title insurance company raised the defense that Denise Edwards couldn’t show she’d actually been harmed by the supposed kickback so she doesn’t have standing, under Article III of the Constitution, to sue. Standing is a threshold issue in every lawsuit, and plenty of defendants outside of the real estate industry would love to see a sweeping ruling from the court that plaintiffs have to be able to show they were harmed in order to bring a suit. All kinds of class actions -- such as the privacy cases that have become so common against Internet companies -- could be wiped out, depending on how broadly the justices rule.

While we wait, something about First American, which will also be decided today: Aaron Panner argued for F.A., Jeffrey Lamken for respondent

But of course, the main event are a package of cases that we've come to call the health care cases, plural because there are several parts.

One asks whether the case is ripe--that is--whether the court can even rule at this time. This involves the anti tax injunction act. We don't care so much about this because no one expects them to hold up the case on these grounds

Then they move to the queastion of the constitutionality of the so-called "individual mandate." The government didnt even use the term mandate in its briefs by the way. The challengers--the states challenging the law--did.

The question, and there's no precedent on point, is whether the commerce clause of the constitution allows the government to require people to purchase health insurance.

RT @HarvardHSPH: Will Supreme Court justices' personal health struggles influence their decision? ht.ly #SCOTUS

RT @ReutersLegal: Our official Supreme Court live blog is starting now. Please join us for live coverage and analysis: reut.rs

I've got butterflies in my stomach now...#SCOTUS

@mygershberg are you covered for that?

Margaret Flowers, Baltimore doc: best way to get to universal health care is to erase two words from the Medicare Act: "over 65" #scotus

And opposition from the right: Pastor Gary Dull of Altoona, PA: "Every time gov grows an oz, we lose a lb of freedom." #scotus

10 AM. Here we go...

I dont remember such a tense day at the court..since...who remembers?

Right. Bush v. Gore

That is, there were plenty of seats in the press overflow and in the VIP sections. Others still in line upset they were not let in.