Although the Big Decision isn’t scheduled until Thursday, the Supreme Court may have already set the tone for the week by judging like Solomon. There was a decision for conservatives upholding Citizens United. There was a decision for liberals banning mandatory life in prison without parole for juvenile offenders. And there was a split decision that struck down parts of the Arizona immigration law but retained its core feature: the requirement that police demand identification from suspected illegal immigrants.But the Supreme Court also gave no clues about the decision everybody is waiting for on healthcare.No system of law or justice is ever going to be perfect. People will find much to complain about however the court decides. I am just glad we live in a country where these decisions are made by judges under the law rather than by politicians seeking votes, and hope that the current justices can find a way, as their predecessors going back to John Marshall’s era have done so often in the past, to strengthen confidence in the rule of law even as they decide the tough cases.Regardless of what happens on Thursday, I have my problems with Obamacare. It is clearly a poorly designed law, written in a rush and adopted in a botched process after Scott Brown’s victory meant that it could only pass the Senate through a fudge. It is also fundamentally unjust in that it forces young people today to subsidize the care of the middle aged without being able to guarantee them the same kind of care and subsidy when they in turn grow old. Beyond that, the law doesn’t do enough to promote the kind of reform and restructuring of the health care system that we really need — harnessing IT to health care in ways that improve outcomes and reduce costs. Although the current law has some good ideas in it, on balance it seems more likely to prevent vital change rather than to enable it.Those are not the matters the Court is called, however, to decide. Its decision needs to rest on constitutional grounds and not political ones. Let us hope that the decision, whatever it is, rests on clear constitutional reasoning and promotes rather than undermines respect for the law.