Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword or section
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
U.S. Dep't of Health & Human Services v. Florida, Cato Legal Briefs

U.S. Dep't of Health & Human Services v. Florida, Cato Legal Briefs

Ratings: (0)|Views: 4,483|Likes:
Published by Cato Institute

More info:

Published by: Cato Institute on Feb 10, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

10/10/2013

pdf

text

original

 
No. 11-398
 
In the Supreme Court of the United States
 __________ 
D
EPARTMENT OF
H
EALTH
&
 
H
UMAN
S
ERVICES
,
 
E
T
 A 
L
.,
 
P
ETITIONERS
 
v.
S
TATES OF
F
LORIDA 
,
 
E
T
 A 
L
.,
 
R
ESPONDENTS
 
 __________ On Writ of Certiorari to the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit __________ BRIEF OF
 AMICI CURIAE 
CATO INSTITUTE,COMPETITIVE ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE,PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION,14 OTHER ORGANIZATIONS, AND 333 STATE LEGISLATORSSUPPORTING RESPONDENTS(INDIVIDUAL MANDATE ISSUE) __________ 
T
IMOTHY 
S
 ANDEFUR
 Pacific Legal Foundation930 G St.Sacramento, CA 95834(916) 419-7111tms@pacificlegal.orgR
OBERT
 A.
 
L
EVY 
 I
LYA 
S
HAPIRO
 
Counsel of Record
 A 
NASTASIA 
ILLIAN
 Cato Institute1000 Mass. Ave., N.W.Washington, DC 20001(202) 842-0200ishapiro@cato.org
Counsel for
 Amici Curiae
 
 
QUESTION PRESENTED
Can a limited government to whom a free people havedelegated only certain enumerated powers comman-deer that people into purchasing a product from aprivate business pursuant to its power to pass laws“necessary and proper for carrying into execution” theauthority to “regulate Commerce . . . among the sev-eral States”?
 
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTSPage
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES.......................................v
 
INTEREST OF
 AMICI CURIAE 
................................1
 
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT....................................2
 
 ARGUMENT...............................................................6
 
I.
 
The Individual Mandate Exceeds the Scope of the Necessary and Proper Clause as Used toExecute the Power to Regulate InterstateCommerce Under the “Substantial Effects”Doctrine.................................................................6 A.
 
The “Substantial Effects” Doctrine Appliesthe Necessary and Proper Clause to theCommerce Clause and Allows Congress toUse Its Regulatory Authority WhileCabining That Authority.................................6B. Compelling Activity Transcends the Neces-sary and Proper Clause’s Limits on theCommerce Clause...........................................12C. The
Comstock
Factors That Are the Most Re-cent Articulation of the Necessary andProper Clause’s Limits Weigh Against theIndividual Mandate.......................................14II.
 
The Individual Mandate Cannot be Justified asan “Essential Part of a Broader RegulatoryScheme” Because Congress Cannot RegulateInactivity.............................................................17 A. Inactivity is Not a Type of Activity...............18B. The Activity-Based Categorical DistinctionProvides Judicially Manageable Standardswith a Minimum of Judicial Policymaking....20

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->