Logourl black
From our private database of 13,800+ case briefs...

National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius

United States Supreme Court
132 S.Ct. 2566 (2012)

National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius

Facts

The National Federation of Independent Business, 26 states, and a number of individuals and businesses (plaintiffs) filed suit in several different federal district courts against Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services and others (defendants) challenging the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (the Act) enacted by Congress. Specifically, the plaintiffs claimed that two provisions of the Act, the individual mandate, which required U.S. citizens to pay a penalty if they did not purchase a health insurance policy, and the Medicaid expansion provision, which required the states to greatly expand the pool or risk losing their existing federal funds, were unconstitutional. The several district courts reached different conclusions. The U.S. District Court for Northern District of Florida held in favor of the plaintiffs and struck down the Act in its entirety. The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part, concluding that the individual mandate was unconstitutional but severable from the rest of the Act. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to review and to resolve the split among the appellate courts.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Holding and Reasoning (Roberts, C.J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Concurrence/Dissent (Ginsburg, J.)

The concurrence/dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the judge’s concurrence in part and dissent in part. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Dissent (Scalia, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 170,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.