Florida v. Department of Health and Human Services
Linked with:
- U.S. Department of Health and Human Services v. Florida
- National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius
| Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11-400 | 11th Cir. |
Mar 28, 2012 Tr.Aud. |
TBD | TBD | TBD | OT 2011 |
Issue: (1) Does Congress exceed its enumerated powers and violate basic principles of federalism when it coerces States into accepting onerous conditions that it could not impose directly by threatening to withhold all federal funding under the single largest grant-in-aid program, or does the limitation on Congress‘s spending power that this Court recognized in South Dakota v. Dole, 483 U.S. 203 (1987), no longer apply? (One hour of argument time allotted on this question.) (2) To what extent (if any) can the individual mandate provision of the Affordable Care Act be severed from the remainder of the Act? (Consolidated with National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius for ninety minutes of argument on this question.)
Plain English Issue: (1) Whether Congress can require states to choose between complying with provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or losing federal funding for the Medicaid program; and (2) whether, if the Court concludes that the provision of the Act requiring virtually all Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty is unconstitutional, the rest of the Act can remain in effect or must also be invalidated.
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- New plea to rule on health mandate
- In Plain English: Conditions or unconstitutional coercion?
- Argument recap: Will Medicaid be sacrificed? (FINAL UPDATE 7:08 pm)
- Argument recap: Moving on to the mandate (FINAL UPDATE)
- Argument preview: Health care, Part III -- Beyond the mandate
- Argument preview: Health care, Part II -- Fate of the mandate
- Argument preview: Health care, Part I -- The power to decide?
- Prompt release of health care audiotapes
- Challengers lose on health arguments
- Health care challengers' view on argument
Briefs and Documents
- SCOTUSblog Health Care resource page
- Constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act symposium page
- Lyle Denniston's Media Guide
- SCOTUSblog's highlights from the argument audio are here.
- Brief for Private Petitioners
- Brief for the State Petitioners
- Reply Brief for Private Petitioners
- Reply Brief for the State Petitioners
- Brief for the American Civil Rights Union
- Brief for the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America
- Brief for the American Center for Law and Justice et al.
- Brief for the Competitive Enterprise Institute et al.
- Brief for Economists
- Brief for the Family Research Council
- Brief for the Justice and Freedom Fund
- Brief for Members of the United States Senate
- Brief for the National Restaurant Association
- Brief for the Western Center for Journalism
- Brief for America's Health Insurance Plans and Blue Cross Blue Shield Association
- Brief for Texas Public Policy Foundation and Cato Institute
- Brief for the Department of Health and Human Services et al.
- Reply Brief for the Department of Health and Human Services et al.
- Brief for the National Indian Health Board, et al.
- Brief for the Michigan Legal Services, Inc., and Other Michigan Non-Profit Corporations
- Brief for California et al.
- Brief for the Missouri Attorney General
- Brief for the American Public Health Association et al.
- Brief for the American Medical Student Association et al.
- Brief for AARP et al.
- Brief for Asian & Pacific Islander American Health Forum, et al.
- Brief for David R. Riemer and Community Advocates
- Brief for the Washington and Lee University School of Law Black Lung Clinic
- Brief for the Michigan Legal Services, Inc., and Other Michigan Non-Profit Corporations
- Brief for Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence et al.
- Brief for Association of American Physicians et al.
- Brief for Catholic Sisters in Support of Respondents Regarding the Medicaid Issue
- Brief for the Independence Institute
- Brief for Indiana State Legislators et al.
- Brief for James F. Blumstein
- Brief for Texas Public Policy Foundation and 36 Texas State Legislators
- Brief for Economists
- Brief for Association of American Physicians and Surgeons and Individual Physicians
- Brief for the National Minority AIDS Council
- Brief for the American Hospital Association et al.
- Brief for David R. Riemer and Community Advocates
- Brief for David Satcher, M.D., Ph.D., et al.
- Brief for Health Law & Policy Scholars and Prescription Policy Choices
- Brief for National Health Law Program et al.
- Brief for Service Employees International Union and Change to Win Brief for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid et al.
- Brief for State Legislators from the Fifty States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico
- Brief for Oregon et al.
- Brief for Faithful Reform in Health Care and the WISC Health Care Working Group
- Brief for the Disability Rights Legal Center
Certiorari-stage documents
- Opinion below (11th Cir.)
- Petition for certiorari
- Brief in opposition
- Petitioners' reply
- Amicus brief of America's Health Insurance Plans
- Amicus brief of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America (forthcoming)
- Amicus brief of Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (forthcoming)
- Amicus brief of American Center for Law and Justice
- Amicus brief of Family Research Council
- Amicus brief of Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence
- Amicus brief of Lawrence J. Dickson, Ph.D.
