Oh, but they'll claim their arguments were just fine, it's this biased conservative court that's the problem. National Review covers a lot of ground in this piece, but here's what they say about the ideological court:
In recent reports, it’s been noted that 20 percent of the Court’s cases were decided 5–4 in the 2010 term. True, but 48 percent of the cases were decided 9–0, which reflects a pattern that has held for years. Is the Roberts Court any more divided than the William Rehnquist Court in 2000, when 30 percent of the cases were decided 5–4? Is the fact that Roberts and Alito agree 96 percent of the time really more troubling than the fact that Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor agree 94 percent of the time?I hope they make the right decision. A wrong decision here, combined with Kelo, means that Americans essentially have no rights remaining that the government doesn't grant.
Update: Why did legal elites underestimate the case against the mandate?
Ridiculing the need for a limiting principle or other anti-mandate arguments may get approving nods in the faculty lounge, but, as we saw this week, it won’t receive an equally warm welcome in court.