A victory today for President Obama as the supreme court rules in favor of health care for everyone.

The mandate would require all Americans to purchase health insurance and those who don’t will be penalized with a tax, which in effect, would be the cost of a years worth of coverage.

The court ruled that congress has the right to levy a tax on the citizens of the United States.

The dissenters including Anthony M. Kennedy, contend that the law is overreaching.

The majority, lead Chief Justice Roberts, agree that the Affordable Care Act is Constitutional but did substantially limit the law requiring the expansion of Medicaid by the states.

The court’s ruling, seen as one of the most significant in decades, is a crucial milestone for the law, allowing almost all of its far-reaching changes to roll forward. Several of its notable provisions have already been put in place in the past two years, and more are imminent. Ultimately, it is intended to end the United States’ status as the only rich country with large numbers of uninsured people, by expanding both the private market and Medicaid.

President Obama spoke from the White House shortly after the decision was handed down. “Whatever the politics, today’s decision was a victory for people all over this country whose lives are more secure because of this law,” he said.

Bone marrow donors may be compensated for their donations.

This ruling will increase the odds of patients finding matches when in need of transplants, which must be a genetic match.

The court said that new technologies for transplanting bone marrow make the tissue more like blood and less like an organ.

The National Organ Transplant Act prohibits compensation for human organs, such as kidneys, but allows payment for renewable tissues such as blood.

A California nonprofit MoreMarrowDonors.org, sued U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in 2009, challenging the ban on compensation for bone marrow donations.

They argued that allowing financial incentives for bone marrow donation was crucial because of the extreme difficulty of finding a genetic match.

The suit said the ban violated the U.S. Constitution because it treated bone marrow as a “human organ” while allowing payments for blood, sperm and eggs.

If the 26th amendment in Mississippi passes it is.

The beginning of personhood?

Because the amendment would define a fertilized egg as a person with full legal rights, it could have an impact on a woman’s ability to get the morning-after pill or birth control pills that destroy fertilized eggs, and it could make in vitro fertilization treatments more difficult because it could become illegal to dispose of unused fertilized eggs. This could lead to a nationwide debate about women’s rights and abortion while setting up a possible challenge to the landmark Roe v. Wade case, which makes abortion legal.

The vote is upcoming in Mississippi to declare a fertilized ovum; human egg, a person.

The implications are vast and the arguments many, but in a state with the highest teenage pregnancy and STD rates it looks like the amendment will pass.

Physicians, scientists, women and hospital staff will face a host challenges to deal with the care of patients if this amendment passes.

There are great arguments on both sides.

Considering all the possibilities a new branch of legal practice may be necessary.

There are currently no limits on how many children a sperm donor can father.

There are ethical and practical questions to answer, however, something as simple as connecting with half siblings can become a monumental event with as many as 150 children coming from one donor.

There’s been tons of hype and misinformation regarding Health Care Reform. Many people still have no idea what the new laws entail.

The government has now launched HealthCare.gov in order to help Americans inform themselves about the new law and their insurance and health care options. The site helps you find insurance options, learn about prevention, compare care quality and more. Check it out!