welcome, everybody. "starting point" this morning is the historic day for the supreme court this morning at 10:00 eastern time we'll find out the fate of president obama's health care law. it is a law that will affect every american in this country. we have coverage from all angles this morning. the team, the former senior advisor to bill clinton and worked for the administration when president clinton was proposing his health care reform plan in 1993. dr. sanjay gupta is with us, cnn's chief medical correspondent and also in his free time a practicing neurosurgeon at a public hospital and worked in the white house during the clinton administration and will cain, an attorney and columnist at the the blaze.com and following the case closely. this morning the supreme court will decide whether all or part of the president's affordable care act is constitutional. politically it is considered the signature legislation of president obama's time in office. likely to be as well a centerpiece of the presidential election. stakes are high on all sides. the most contentious part of the law is the individual mandate. it brings us right to jeff toobin live in front of the supreme court with what could happen today. jeff, why don't you start by walking me through what the main issues are that are at stake here. >> this is really an epic case in the history of the supreme court because this piece of legislation affects so many different people. the heart of the dispute in this case is about what you call the individual mandate, the requirement that every american have insurance. obviously most americans already have insurance through their jobs. this law doesn't change that. 30 million people will get insurance according to the obama administration if this law goes fully into effect. there is a requirement in this law that every american have insurance. if you can't afford t the government will subsidize it for you. that requirement that every american have insurance is at the heart of the controversy. what the challenges to the law say is that congress in passing that law exceeded the power that the constitution gives to the congress under article 1 of the constitution to regulate interstate commerce, the commerce clause of the constitution. is the requirement that every american have insurance outside congress's power to regulate the intrastate commerce. that's the toughest question and when we know the answer a little after 10:00 this morning we'll know how much of this law if any will no longer be on the books. >> we will know the answer at 10:00. let's walk through what the court can do. they could strike the individual mandate. they could strike the expansion of medicaid. they could strike the entire thing. they could punt in a way and cite tax law for the punting. where do you come down on that? what do you think is likely to happen there? >> are you asking me? >> yes, i am. >> i think you left out one very distinct possibility which is that they simply affirm the whole law. most of the time when congress -- when the supreme court considers the constitutionality of federal legislation, they say it is fine, it is not the supreme court's job to decide whether law is a good idea, whether they would vote if they were members of congress. the only job of the supreme court is to say whether a piece of legislation is so far outside of congress' power that it is simply unconstitutional and cannot be allowed to stand. based on the oral argument, however, i thought the most likely outcome is that they would strike down the individual mandate, the requirement that people have insurance, but leave most of the rest of the law in tact. that's what i thought the main possibility was but there are certainly many people who think affirming the whole thing is a distinct possibility as well. >> let's walk through the implications of some of those legal decisions first of all. let's say it is upheld altogether and nothing changes. >> one thing that's important so point out is a lot of the law has not gone into effect. for a lot of people they may not notice a big change depending on any of the decisions you just mentioned. until 2014 some of the big provisions won't go into effect. if the whole thing is upheld, essentially you have tens of millions of people who will probably now have access to health care, around 30 million probably they say in part because either they will have to buy it, they can afford it right now, and now they will have to buy it or face a penalty. will you have people who will get subsidized either through expansions of medicaid and various states or through subsidies and people will be able to buy this on exchanges as well come 2014. you can see a dramatic number of people who have health care insurance then who don't have it now. >> let's say the individual mandate is struck down. >> this is an interesting thing. the mandate if you think about that sort of as the funding arm if you will of this whole thing, so it helps pay for people who are sick you understand why you have to have it. i think there is another part, the psychology of it, saying, look, i will buy insurance when i need it and i know they can't charge any any more money so why would i be it until i need t i will get sick and then i will buy insurance. the car insurance analogy like i just got in a wreck and all the car insurance company and say i have car insurance now and they can't charge more money. you could see where that is a problem and that is tried in various places at the state level. in kentucky they tried it in the mid-'90s and insurance companies cannot discriminate against people based on preexisting conditions >> and did people wait? >> people waited and everybody's insurance premiums went up by up to 40%. so even people that said i have no dog in this race and haven't paid attention and all of a sudden they saw their premiums go up as well and they started paying attention and eventually it was overturned. >> let's turn to jim acosta looking at the political implications because it is not happening in a vacuum. he laughs when i say vacuum of course. walk me through what it means, what the risks, the upsides and the downsides for each candidate and start with mitt romney for me, please. >> for mitt romney obviously if this law is struck down today what the obama campaign is going to say is that, wait a minute, when mitt romney was governor of massachusetts he passed a law that is almost exactly the same law the president signed when he was passing health care reform a couple of years ago. we have heard the president just in recent days go afternoon mitt romney on this issue because romney has said if the supreme court does not rule this law unconstitutional and does not throw it out he will seek to repeal it on day one of the administration and what the president said in recent days is mitt romney wants to take us back to the day when insurance companies could discriminate against people with preskpising conditions. the romney campaign says wait a minute, that's not the case f mitt romney is elected president he will come into office and repeal what they call obama care and he will put in place a different kind of health care reform that does not have an individual mandate and that does cover people with preexisting conditions and that does provide some of those consumer protections and goes back to what sanjay was saying a few moments ago which is, wait a minute, none of that stuff works without the individual mandate, so, soledad, i think what we have here if the supreme court case goes down, if the president's law goes down today sort of a whole new stage of this campaign and that it is going to be over health care reform. both sides will be asked what do we do now because potentially there are millions of americans who might be affected by all of this. >> let's talk a little bit, will, about the centerpiece, the individual man at a time and really it is all about the constitution, isn't it? >> it is all about the constitution. listen, soledad, anybody watching this program knows that i have opinions and i am not hiding them. however, i also am an attorney and do understand this law and i want to explain to the viewers what the supreme court is debating, what the issue is at hand. if die venture into the world of opinion, we have another 20er7b, one who worked for bill clinton and of course we have jeff toobin with us to pull me back into position. >> i am glad jeff is here with me. >> in order to her or not congress has the positive you are to compel americans to buy insurance, the individual mandate, we have to turn to the constitution. the constitution is a list of enumerated powers. it is a fancy way of saying here is a list of things congress can do. i want to focus on two of them. congress has the power to tax and spend. this is right here at the top of the powers. this, i know you can't read t it is old english script so i got it blown up. this is the general welfare clause that reads that congress shall have the power to lay and protect accident at thats, provide for the common defense and general welfare. why is that important? we have had a ton of congressional laws passed through the taxing power, things like a government retirement program and a/k/a social security or health insurance program for the elderly and medicare and, however, the taxing power is not the constitutional justification by most accounts for the individual mandate. rather, congress and the government went down a few lines to this line right here, what is called the interstate commerce clause. tid blown up here. it reads like this, that congress shall have the power to regulate with foreign nations and among the several states. again, this power has been read very, very broadly by the supreme court. it has been used to justify laws such as requiring that restaurants serve all americans regardless of what race they are, the 1964 civil rights laws, and most of our federal criminal code has been read through the interstate commerce power, rico laws, regulating medical marijuana and labor laws as well have been brought to us through the interstate commerce clause. here is the did he pat they're debating today. there is argument this is a great leap forward. for the first time congress is forcing you into commerce. it is requiring that you buy health insurance. that, according to those challenging the law, is the great leap forward. you saw several justices ask questions, essentially asking what this term, a limiting principle. what's the limiting principle, recognizing that the constitution is is a document of limited powers. if we allow you to do this, what can't do you? where is this the limit on this document? that's where questions came in like if we do this can the government require to you buy broccoli or can the government require you to buy burial insurance? that's the debate. >> there are other instances, right, where the government does require you to do things. the government requires to you buy insurance or you cannot drive your car. >> that's right. >> the federal government does not. >> no, but there is a state requirement to do so. so how is that different? >> first -- >> i want so say so far have you done a better job explaining this than i think the solicitor general did at the supreme court. i mean, remember, there was the argument where he seemed flustered. i think that's pretty fair. i think you have bent over backwards a little bit not to state a position. i think that's pretty fair. there are plenty of instances where the government can require you to do something, so especially when in an area like health care where it forms so much of the economic activity that we all engage in everywhere. it is like 1/8th of the total economic activity of the country. >> but richard makes a good point. that's the question the justices asked the government. if you can do this, what can you not do and they had trouble answering that question. they had trouble providing a limitation. in the end the argument was this, the health care market is different, it is just simply different. that did not sit well with a lot of the justices in two hours, three hours we'll find out if they do see the health care market as different. >> the one thing i would add to this, a lot of the argument around this that has taken place is how far -- how much of a stretch is this health care law in terms of how far is it stretching the present constitutional law and most scholars believe when this law was going into effect that this was very much within the normal range of the activity that was regulated, so i think that we have seen, you know, the political here also coming in on the legal. >> we'll talk about that this morning. this is all being done in a political context. we have all morning to talk about health care law and the specific implications that it will have for people that need health insurance or may not want to buy health insurance. we'll continue the conversation all morning long and we'll speak to republican senator mike lee. i think i said he is from new york. he is from utah. we're going to talk to democratic senator chuck schumer who is from new york. they will both be joining me live this morning. fist we have to get to breaking news. a massive explosion outside the palace of justice in damascus. christine romans has an update for us. >> let's start with the breaking news out of sir a state tv reports a bomb exploded in damascus in the parking area outside of the palace of justice being described as a terrorist bombing. so far no word on casualties. stay with cnn for the breaking details. we'll have more pictures and news for you throughout the morning. history on tap in the house today. an unprecedented vote on whether to cite attorney general eric holder for contempt of congress. holder was at the white house attending the annual congressional picnic. republicans accuse holder of stonewalling on the fast and furious weapons program by withholding some documents. that program allowed guns to end up in the hands of mexican cartels and linked to the death of a u.s. border parole agent. president obama asserted executive privilege over some of the documents. next hour we'll talk with emanuel cleaver about the possible walkout during the vote. hundreds of homes on fire, 36,000 people forced to flee as wildfires burn out of control in colorado this morning. take a look at these images from the denver post just showing the extent of damage the fires are doing. there is hope today that calmer winds will improve the situation, but this fight is far from over. meteorologist rob marciano is live this morning in colorado springs. good morning, rob. >> hi, christine. winds are relatively calm now. that's what happens at night but during the day yesterday what will probably happen again today, thunderstorms will kick up not necessarily dropping beneficial raining but enhancing the winds and making the fire behavior veriy rat and i can at times the fire fighters had actually to seek safe places and the picture that is we have seen come in, a terrifying night tuesday night and a scary day yesterday as well and no official count and certainly well over 100 and maybe 200 or 300 homes burned here just in the northwest suburbs of colorado springs. this is the surreal part, just over my left shoulder you see city lights and cars driving by and west of i-25 is where the subdivision took the brunt of the flames and that's the point in which they're trying to beat back the fire. only 5% containment, over 18,000 homes or acres burned and over 32,000 people have been evacuated. part of the reason, the flames burned so hot, the heat and the dry air here which is now moving to the east and several states, over 20 states east now of the mississippi are going to be affected by intense heat and some cases dangerously hot and humid conditions over the next several days. chicago, cincinnati, d.c., all cities that will see temperatures at times up and over 100 and maybe touching the 100 degree mark through the weekend. christine. >> also on the move, debby. as debby moves away from florida, there is more rain in the forecast, scattered showers and storms across central florida over the weekend. some areas hit with 26 inches of rain this week, more than 5,000 people in several counties still without power and officials say four people died in separate incidents. thank you for the update. still ahead this morning we'll continue our conversation about today's historic health care decision and we'll get insight from senator mike lee of utah. he used to be a clerk, a former law clerk for samuel alito. interesting to get his perspective. he is convinced they will strike down all or part of the law. the right and left have lots to say about the law and usually on different sides, but what's true? what's false? we're fact checking both sides this morning. you're watching "starting point." we have to take a short break. back in just a moment. but their shakes aren't always made for people with diabetes. that's why there's glucerna hunger smart shakes. they have carb steady, with carbs that digest slowly to help minimize blood sugar spikes. and they have six grams of sugars. with fifteen grams of protein to help manage hunger... look who's getting smart about her weight. [ male announcer ] glucerna hunger smart. a smart way to help manage hunger and diabetes. and the chefs at lean cuisine are loving tangy lemon, peppery poblano, sweet butternut. we're roasting, and grilling to create must-have meals with no preservatives. lean cuisine. be culinary chic. a living, breathing intelligence teaching data how to do more for business. [ beeping ] in here, data knows what to do. because the network finds it and tailors it across all the right points, automating all the right actions, to bring all the right results. [ whirring and beeping ] it's the at&t network -- doing more with data to help business do more for customers. ♪ to help business do more for customers. we charge everything else... maybe it's time to recharge the human battery. only the beautyrest recharge sleep system combines the comfort of aircool memory foam layered on top of beautyrest pocketed coils to promote proper sleeping posture all night long. the revolutionary recharge sleep system from beautyrest... it's you, fully charged. get a free set of sheets when you buy a select beautyrest mattress. hurry, offer ends soon. i'm one of six children that my mother raised by herself, and so college was a dream when i was a kid. i didn't know how i was gonna to do it, but i knew i was gonna get that opportunity one day, and that's what happened with university of phoenix. nothing can stop me now. i feel like the sky's the limit with what i can do and what i can accomplish. my name is naphtali bryant and i am a phoenix. visit phoenix.edu to find the program that's right for you. enroll now. welcome back to "starting point," everybody. we'll return to the health care conversation. in less than three hours the justices will announce their ruling and as we all know and talking about for a long time, this could change the entire frame of health care in this country. mike lee from utah is a former law clerk to justice samuel alito and attended oral arguments in the supreme court's health care case. nice to see you. thanks for talking with us this morning. which way do you think it will go? >> i think the court is likely to invalidate the individual mandate. this is something that for most americans off fends their basic sense of freedom and not something they want. i think the justices understand this doesn't fall comfortably within any of congress's powers. >> some people have said and most notably jeff toobin if it is roberts writing the decision, that signals something. what do you think that signals. >> if it is chief