Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2213466
 
 

Footnotes (69)



 


 



Heed Not the Umpire (Justice Ginsburg Called NFIB)


Nicole Huberfeld


University of Kentucky College of Law

January 29, 2013

University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law Heightened Scrutiny, Vol. 15, No. 43, 2013

Abstract:     
A bad reading of the facts in NFIB v. Sebelius has led to new limitations on Congress’s Commerce, Necessary and Proper, and Spending Clause powers. The decision appeared to use healthcare as a vehicle for constitutional change, leading to interpretive gymnastics that invite further litigation. This essay highlights the factual errors in Chief Justice Roberts’s and the joint dissent’s opinions and explains why Justice Ginsburg’s more fact-attuned opinion was the correct analysis of the case.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 14

Keywords: Supreme Court, NFIB v. Sebelius, Medicaid, federalism, health reform

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: February 8, 2013  

Suggested Citation

Huberfeld, Nicole, Heed Not the Umpire (Justice Ginsburg Called NFIB) (January 29, 2013). University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law Heightened Scrutiny, Vol. 15, No. 43, 2013. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2213466

Contact Information

Nicole Huberfeld (Contact Author)
University of Kentucky College of Law ( email )
258 Law Building
Lexington, KY 40506-0048
United States
859-257-3281 (Phone)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 269
Downloads: 56
Download Rank: 221,366
Footnotes:  69

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.281 seconds