The Taxing Power Of The Federal Government And The General Welfare: What Are The Limits In The Wake Of NFIB V. Sebelius?

Authors

  • Mark Klock

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/lawreview.2015.331

Abstract

The Affordable Care Act seeks to remedy the problem of information asymmetry in the health insurance market by mandating that everyone obtain health insurance or pay a penalty, and by requiring the States to expand Medicaid or lose existing federal funds. In NFIB v. Sebelius, Chief Justice Roberts held that Congress’ power to regulate under the Commerce Clause could not justify the Individual Mandate to purchase insurance, but that the penalty could be construed as a tax and upheld under the taxing power. Chief Justice Roberts also held the Medicaid Expansion to be an unconstitutional use of spending power, but determined that the Medicaid Expansion could remain with the States having the option to keep existing funding and not expand or expand and take the incremental funding. Eight Justices disagreed with the Chief Justice on the Individual Mandate, and six Justices disagreed with the Chief Justice on the Medicaid Expansion. This creates a paradox in that a supermajority of the Court believes the case was wrongly decided on both main questions. More distressing is the scant analysis given in all of the opinions to the constitutional constraints on taxes.

Downloads

Published

2015-07-27

How to Cite

Klock, Mark. 2015. “The Taxing Power Of The Federal Government And The General Welfare: What Are The Limits In The Wake Of NFIB V. Sebelius?”. University of Pittsburgh Law Review 76 (3). https://doi.org/10.5195/lawreview.2015.331.

Issue

Section

Articles