PORT ANGELES — Former lawyer and investment banker Kaj Ahlburg said Friday he listened to recordings of last week’s oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court over a history-making case that bears his name and could touch more than 30 million Americans.

But he continued to maintain his staunch silence about how and why he decided to become one of the few individual plaintiffs who joined 26 states, including Washington, in challenging President Barack Obama’s Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act, called Obamacare by its critics.

After six hours of oral arguments Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, the court was behind closed doors Friday, voting on the case in a decision not expected to be made public until June, after the jurists write majority and minority opinions.

“My purpose was not to seek publicity,” said Ahlburg, 52.

“It did not enter into my consideration.”

His wife, Laura, joined him in listening to some of the oral arguments, he said.

Won’t go into details

“I won’t get into the details of which parts I listened to and which parts I didn’t,” he said.

“Sometimes there’s been publicity around cases that has not been positively perceived by the judges, who feel in some way that publicity is not appropriate or just don’t think it helps the case.”

“Statements are not helpful while the case is in progress, so I am refraining.”

Supreme Court pundits said the judges’ questions during oral arguments indicated the outcome will be in Ahlburg’s, not Obama’s, favor.

“A good judge will ask searching questions of both parties and not necessarily reveal what they are thinking,” Ahlburg said.

The law requires all Americans to buy health insurance — especially the estimated 30 million to 50 million who don’t have it — or pay a penalty of $95 in 2014 that increases to $695 in 2016.

Proponents say the mandate is necessary to pay for the health care of all Americans.

Ahlburg’s name was added as a plaintiff in the case May 14, 2010.

“Mr. Ahlburg is and reasonably expects to remain financially able to pay for his own health care services if and as needed,” the amended complaint said.

“Mr. Ahlburg will be subject to the mandate and objects to being forced to comply with it and objects to the Act’s unconstitutional overreaching and its encroachment on the states’ sovereignty.”

Ahlburg’s lawyer, Gregory Katsas of Washington, D.C., did not return a call for comment Saturday.

________

Senior Staff Writer Paul Gottlieb can be reached at 360-417-3536 or at paul.gottlieb@peninsuladailynews.com.