|
gptkbp:instanceOf
|
gptkb:United_States_Supreme_Court_case
|
|
gptkbp:area
|
gptkb:constitutional_law
health law
|
|
gptkbp:arguedDate
|
2012-03-27
2012-03-26
2012-03-28
|
|
gptkbp:citation
|
567 U.S. 519
|
|
gptkbp:concurringOpinionBy
|
gptkb:Ruth_Bader_Ginsburg
gptkb:Sonia_Sotomayor
gptkb:Elena_Kagan
gptkb:Stephen_Breyer
|
|
gptkbp:country
|
gptkb:United_States
|
|
gptkbp:date
|
2012-06-28
|
|
gptkbp:decidedBy
|
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
|
|
gptkbp:dissentingOpinionBy
|
gptkb:Anthony_Kennedy
gptkb:Antonin_Scalia
gptkb:Clarence_Thomas
gptkb:Samuel_Alito
|
|
gptkbp:docketNumber
|
11-393
|
|
gptkbp:fullName
|
gptkb:National_Federation_of_Independent_Business_v._Sebelius
|
|
gptkbp:heldBy
|
The individual mandate is constitutional as a tax.
Congress cannot coerce states into expanding Medicaid by threatening existing funding.
The Medicaid expansion provision is unconstitutional as written.
|
|
https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label
|
NFIB v. Sebelius
|
|
gptkbp:impact
|
Upheld most provisions of the Affordable Care Act
Limited federal power under the Spending Clause
|
|
gptkbp:leader
|
gptkb:John_Roberts
|
|
gptkbp:majorityOpinionBy
|
gptkb:John_Roberts
|
|
gptkbp:petitioner
|
gptkb:National_Federation_of_Independent_Business
|
|
gptkbp:predecessor
|
gptkb:King_v._Burwell
gptkb:California_v._Texas
|
|
gptkbp:relatedLegislation
|
gptkb:Affordable_Care_Act
|
|
gptkbp:response
|
gptkb:Kathleen_Sebelius
|
|
gptkbp:subject
|
gptkb:Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act
Medicaid expansion
individual mandate
|
|
gptkbp:bfsParent
|
gptkb:National_Federation_of_Independent_Business_v._Sebelius
|
|
gptkbp:bfsLayer
|
5
|