Title: National Federation of Independent Businesses v. Sebelius (2012) – U.S. Conlawpedia
Headings: National Federation of Independent Businesses v. Sebelius (2012)
National Federation of Independent Businesses v. Sebelius (2012)
Introduction
Case Timeline
June 23, 1987
S.D. v. Dole Decision
August 12, 2011
The 11th circuit found that the individual manadate was unconstitutional in the case of obamacare
10:19 AM March 28, 2012 — 11:19 AM March 28, 2012
Oral Arguments
June 28, 2012
Decision Announcement
S.D. v. Dole Decision
The 11th circuit found that the individual manadate was unconstitutional in the case of obamacare
Oral Arguments
Decision Announcement
Background
Procedural History
Issues
Individual Mandate
The Tax Power-
Commerce Clause-
Necessary and Proper Clause-
Medicaid Expansion
Holdings
Individual Mandate
Medicaid Expansion
Majority Opinion
Individual Mandate-
Medicaid Expansion-
Separate Opinions
Significance / Impact
The Roberts Doctrine
Text of Case Opinions
External Resource Links
Major Statute Under Review
Important Precedents
Important Subsequent Cases

Content: National Federation of Independent Businesses v. Sebelius (2012) – U.S. Conlawpedia
National Federation of Independent Businesses v. Sebelius (2012)
Introduction
After election, President Barack Obama and his administration had been focused on healthcare which led to the creation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. This highlighted the need for reform in the American health care system which has been highly costly. The reform had been highly controversial, and questions about if this Act was the best solution or if this would solve anything were raised. This has led to discourse over the constitutionality of the Act. The questions and concerns about the constitutionality of the Act had led several states to file a suit against it which reached the Supreme Court. The National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012) became a major Supreme Court case that reevaluated the limits of what the Federal Government could regulate and how they would enforced it. The disagreement, though highly partisan, had arisen from several constitutional issues that the Act raised. The arguers had questioned the application of the two main things which were the individual mandate and the Medicaid expansion. The individual mandate is law requiring certain civilian to purchase particular goods or services, in this case health insurance. The Medicaid expansion was the expansion of Medicaid program to wider reach of individuals within a certain income bracket and under 65 and the objection to the expansion would lead to the loss of all Medicaid funds.