<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius by Matthew Esho</title>
      <link>https://padlet.com/matthew_zro/h7sjnryedo0i</link>
      <description>Team 2</description>
      <language>en-us</language>
      <pubDate>2018-09-18 06:13:08 UTC</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>2018-09-18 06:20:35 UTC</lastBuildDate>
      <webMaster>hello@padlet.com</webMaster>
      
      <item>
         <title>Facts</title>
         <author>matthew_zro</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/matthew_zro/h7sjnryedo0i/wish/282715762</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>Case related to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act which was enacted in 2010. Goal for this healthcare was provide healthcare for more people in the nation while bringing down the costs. The ultimate goal was to have everyone in the nation with some type health coverage whether minimal or in full. The Affordable Care Act stated that if a state did not comply with the new laws, that it would suffer some federal funding.</div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2018-09-18 06:14:35 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/matthew_zro/h7sjnryedo0i/wish/282715762</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>History</title>
         <author>matthew_zro</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/matthew_zro/h7sjnryedo0i/wish/282715914</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>Many people including individuals, 26 states, and the National Federation of Independent Business went ahead and challenged these provisions. The Federal Government then appealed to the Eleventh Circuit, which affirmed the district court's ruling, but allowed that portion to be severed and upheld the constitutionality of the remainder of the Act.</div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2018-09-18 06:15:05 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/matthew_zro/h7sjnryedo0i/wish/282715914</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>Issues</title>
         <author>matthew_zro</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/matthew_zro/h7sjnryedo0i/wish/282716029</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>Whether Congress had the power to require individuals to purchase health insurance. Whether the individual mandate could be severed from the rest of the law, and whether the Medicaid expansion provision was unconstitutionally coercive to states.</div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2018-09-18 06:15:38 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/matthew_zro/h7sjnryedo0i/wish/282716029</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>Holding</title>
         <author>matthew_zro</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/matthew_zro/h7sjnryedo0i/wish/282716324</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>It was found unconstitutional because of being unable to force someone to purchase healthcare. The Supreme Court upheld the individual mandate as an exercise of Congress' Article I power to lay and collect taxes rather than its authority to regulate interstate commerce.</div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2018-09-18 06:16:29 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/matthew_zro/h7sjnryedo0i/wish/282716324</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>Reasoning</title>
         <author>matthew_zro</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/matthew_zro/h7sjnryedo0i/wish/282716892</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>A 5-4 vote of the Court upheld the constitutionality of the individual mandate as a valid use of Congress’ power to lay and collect taxes.  Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Roberts reasoned that requiring people to pay a financial penalty for failing to obtain health coverage may appropriately be characterized as a tax.  The penalty payment is not so high that people have no choice but to get insurance.  The payment is not limited to willful violations.  Also, the payment is to the IRS through normal taxation means.</div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2018-09-18 06:18:34 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/matthew_zro/h7sjnryedo0i/wish/282716892</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>Result</title>
         <author>matthew_zro</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/matthew_zro/h7sjnryedo0i/wish/282717104</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>Judgment of Eleventh Circuit affirmed insofar as it held that individual mandate exceeded commerce power, reversed to the extent as it health that individual mandate was not authorized by taxing power and reversed to the extent as it held that Medicaid expansion was justified under spending power.</div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2018-09-18 06:19:31 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/matthew_zro/h7sjnryedo0i/wish/282717104</guid>
      </item>
   </channel>
</rss>
