After Three Days of Arguments, How Do You Think the Court Will Rule on Obamacare?

WASHINGTON, DC - MARCH 28: Paul Clement, the attorney representing the 26 states challenging the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, talks to the news media outside the U.S. Supreme Court on the third day of oral arguements over the constitutionality of the act March 28, 2012 in Washington, DC. Wednesday was the last of three days the high court set to hear arguments over the act. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images) — Paul Clement, the attorney representing the 26 states challenging the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, talks to the news media outside the U.S. Supreme Court on the third day of oral arguments over the constitutionality of the act March 28, 2012 in Washington, DC. (Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)

Yesterday concluded the last of three days of the Supreme Court's oral arguments over healthcare reform. The six hours of hearings over three days constituted the longest set of opening oral arguments before the Court in the last 45 years.

On the second day of proceedings, we asked if readers thought the healthcare law's individual mandate is constitutional. 77% said yes, only 22% said no. But a lot has happened since then. Many surprises and twists later, how does the case seem now?

After Three Days of Arguments, How Do You Think the Court Will Rule on Obamacare? Vote Now on Facebook!