It was available before, but it is no longer up. By chance, my Google Reader had archived it:
via The Volokh Conspiracy by Orin Kerr on 3/24/12
Many opponents of the individual mandate have argued that if the individual mandate is upheld, there will be no limits whatsoever on federal power. In contrast, proponents of the individual mandatehave responded that there are several significant limits on federal power even if the mandate is upheld.
I propose that those who have voiced either position must now take a pledge of consistency. Here’s how it will work. If you have argued that upholding the mandate would means that there are no limits on federal power, you should pledge now that if the mandate is upheld, you will never again argue that there are any limits on federal power. On the other hand, if you have argued that there are several significant limits on federal power that are entirely consistent with upholding the mandate, you should pledge now that if the mandate is upheld, you will never question or argue against any of those limits on federal power.
I guess, no deal.
I am not a fan of scrubbing blog posts. The only time I ever deleted something off the interwebs was when Judge Gibson made me get rid of a YouTube video parody of Hitler reacting to Citizens United. It was hilarious. I’ll put it back up once I am outside the clerkship code of ethics.
I know Eugene just blogged about this recently in the context of the media scrubbing a story about Malia Obama going to Mexico.
Update: Thanks to commenter Melech, I see that the post is now back up, with a publication date of 1:00 p.m. I guess the deal is back on?