"There's a significant school of thought that the administration is -- it puts them in a better position for the election if it's turned down," Reid said. He added that he thought the law would be upheld.
That school of thought asserts that having President Obama's signature legislative accomplishment invalidated by the Court allows him to rail against "unelected judges" who subvert the will of the people through complicated legal reasoning. Democrats tried a similar tactic in 2010 after the Court ruled in Citizens United that the First Amendment prohibited restrictions on corporate political donations. A legislative attempt to overturn the ruling, known as the DISCLOSE Act, failed in the Senate. So-called super PACs have thrived since.
Also if the law is invalidated, Republicans may find it hard to whip up public discontent over a law that no longer exists.
However, even if the health law is overturned, there could still be a candidate who backed an existing health care individual mandate. It's a centerpiece of the health care law passed by Republican hopeful Mitt Romney during his tenure as Massachusetts governor. Romney says such a provision reduces free riders in the health care market and encourages people to purchase private insurance -- though he opposes the federal law.
In the end, Reid said that the overwhelming majority of voters in November will base their vote on their view of the economy, rather than the fate of the health care law.