October Term 2011 · Docket 11-393

Does striking the individual mandate require striking the entire health care law?

the sides that brought the case argue the mandate is essential to the law. The government argues the rest survives without it.

Official caption
National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Clement argued the mandate is essential to the rest of the Act.

    Mr. Kneedler argued the minimum coverage provision is constitutional and severability is not needed.

    Justice Sotomayor questioned the economic data on price increases.

    Justice Scalia noted that severability tests vary across Court cases.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

This case tests whether the individual mandate is inseparable from the rest of the health care law. the sides that brought the case claim the mandate supports other provisions. The government claims the law survives without the mandate.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 28, 2012.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the sides that brought the case want the Court to strike the entire law if it strikes the mandate.

The government wants the Court to keep the rest of the law if it strikes the mandate.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the sides that brought the case argue the mandate is essential to the community rating and guaranteed issue provisions.

The government argues the minimum coverage provision is consistent with the Constitution and severability is unnecessary.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Sotomayor asked if the Court should take on more power.

Justice Sotomayor asked if Congress was concerned about rising costs when drafting the law.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This dispute determines whether the health care law survives in part or fails entirely. It defines the limits of congressional power to mandate individual conduct. It shapes the future of federal health policy and state insurance markets.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON