Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES V. FLORIDA

Docket No.: 11-398
Certiorari Granted: 11/14/11
Argued: March 27, 2012
Decided: 06/28/12

Topics:

Affordable Care Act, Anti-Injunction Act, Article I, Commerce Clause, Due Process, EPA, ERISA, Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, Internal Revenue Code, Medicaid, Medicare, Necessary and Proper, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Sherman Act, Social Security Act, Tenth Amendment, child labor, copyright, judicial review, privacy, sovereign immunity

PartyNames: Department of Health and Human Services, et al. v. Florida, et al.
Petitioner: Department of Health and Human Services, et al.
Respondent: Florida, et al.

Court Below: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Citation: 648 F.3d 1235
Supreme Court Docket

Department of Health and Human Services, et al.
v.
Florida, et al.
Background:

Beginning in 2014, the minimum coverage provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Pub. L. No. 111-148, 124 Stat. 119, amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-152, 124 Stat. 1029, will require non-exempted individuals to maintain a minimum level of health insurance or pay a tax penalty. 26 U.S.C.A. 5000A.

Question Presented:

1. Whether Congress had the power under Article I of the Constitution to enact the minimum coverage provision. Petitioners also suggest that the Court direct the parties to address the following question: 2. Whether the suit brought by respondents to challenge the minimum coverage provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is barred by the Anti-Injunction Act, 26 U.S.C. 7421(a).

Note:

IN ADDITION TO QUESTION 1 PRESENTED BY THE PETITION, THE PARTIES ARE DIRECTED TO BRIEF AND ARGUE THE FOLLOWING QUESTION: "WHETHER THE SUIT BROUGHT BY RESPONDENTS TO CHALLENGE THE MINIMUM COVERAGE PROVISIONS OF THE PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT IS BARRED BY THE ANTI-INJUNCTION ACT, 26 U.S.C. §7421(A)." A TOTAL OF TWO HOURS IS ALLOTTED FOR ORAL ARGUMENT ON QUESTION 1. ONE HOUR IS ALLOTTED FOR ORAL ARGUMENT ON THE ADDITIONAL QUESTION. ROBERT A. LONG, ESQ. IS INVITED TO BRIEF AND ARGUE THIS CASE, AS AMICUS CURIAE, IN SUPPORT OF THE POSITION THAT THE ANTI-INJUNCTION ACT, 26 U.S.C. §7421(a), BARS THE SUIT BROUGHT BY RESPONDENTS TO CHALLENGE THE MINIMUM COVERAGE PROVISIONS OF THE PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, 26 U.S.C. §5000A.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES V. FLORIDA
ORAL ARGUMENT

03/27/12

Listen to Oral Argument in DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES V. FLORIDA
Holding: SEE OPINION

Warning: Use of undefined constant caseTitle - assumed 'caseTitle' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/supremec/public_html/supremecourtobserver.com/code/sofunctionsndb.php on line 1147

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES V. FLORIDA
Case Documents

1BRIEF FOR PETITIONERS (Anti-Injunction Act)
2REPLY BRIEF FOR PETITIONERS (Anti-Injunction Act)
3REPLY BRIEF FOR PETITIONERS (Minimum Coverage Provision)
4DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES V. FLORIDA Oral Argument Audio
5BRIEF FOR PETITIONERS (Minimum Coverage Provision)
6REPLY BRIEF FOR STATE RESPONDENTS ON THE ANTI-INJUNCTION ACT
7Opinion in DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES V. FLORIDA
8BRIEF FOR STATE RESPONDENTS ON THE ANTI-INJUNCTION ACT
9BRIEF IN RESPONSE FOR PRIVATE RESPONDENTS
10DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES V. FLORIDA Oral Argument Audio
11Oral Argument Transcript DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES V. FLORIDA (March 26, 2012)
12REPLY BRIEF FOR PETITIONERS
13PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI
14BRIEF FOR STATE RESPONDENTS
15BRIEF FOR PRIVATE RESPONDENTS ON THE ANTI-INJUNCTION ACT
16BRIEF FOR PRIVATE RESPONDENTS ON THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE
17BRIEF FOR COURT-APPOINTED AMICUS CURIAE SUPPORTING VACATUR (ANTI-INJUNCTION ACT)