The Supreme Court's decision in the Health Care Case, NFIB v. Sebelius, gripped the nation's attention during the spring of 2012. No one could have predicted the strange coalition of justices and arguments that would eventually lead the Court to uphold the Affordable Care Act's principal provisions. The constitutional case against the ACA was originally written off as frivolous, but after oral argument at the Court, many predicted that the unthinkable had now become likely. When the Supreme Court delivered its complicated and fractured decision, it offered new interpretations to four different clauses in the Constitution. This volume gathers together reactions to the decision from an ideologically diverse selection of the nation's leading scholars of constitutional, administrative, and health law. They offer novel insights into the meaning of the health care decision for President Obama, the Roberts Court, and the debate over constitutional interpretation.
Contributors Introduction, Nathaniel Persily, Gillian E. Metzger, and Trevor W. Morrison Part I Reflections on the Supreme Court's Decision 1 The Court Affirms the Social Contract Jack M. Balkin 2 Who Won the Obamacare Case? Randy E. Barnett 3 A Most Improbable 1787 Constitution: A (Mostly) Originalist Critique of the Constitutionality of the ACA Richard A. Epstein 4 The June Surprises: Balls, Strikes, and the Fog of War Charles Fried 5 Much Ado: The Potential Impact of the Supreme Court Decision Upholding the Affordable Care Act Robert N. Weiner Part II Lines of Argument: Commerce, Taxing and Spending, Necessary and Proper, and Due Process 6 The Missing Due Process Argument Jamal Greene 7 Necessary, Proper, and Health Care Reform Andrew Koppelman 8 The Presumption of Constitutionality and the Individual Mandate Gillian E. Metzger and Trevor W. Morrison 9 The Individual Mandate and the Proper Meaning of Proper Ilya Somin Part III lcd