NFIB v. Sebelius

E13966

United States Supreme Court case landmark case

NFIB v. Sebelius is the landmark 2012 U.S. Supreme Court case that largely upheld the Affordable Care Act, notably ruling that its individual mandate could be sustained under Congress’s taxing power.

Try in SPARQL Jump to: Surface forms Disambiguation Statements Elicitation Referenced by

All labels observed (5)

Label	Occurrences
National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius	14
NFIB v. Sebelius canonical	4
Defense of the Affordable Care Act in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius	1
Supreme Court case National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius	1
the Supreme Court did not reach the merits of the constitutional challenge to the individual mandate	1

How this entity was disambiguated

This entity first appeared as the object of triple T125944 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.

NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07

Target entity: NFIB v. Sebelius
Context triple: [Taxing and Spending Clause, significantCase, NFIB v. Sebelius]

A. Chiafalo v. Washington
Chiafalo v. Washington is a 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case that unanimously upheld states’ authority to penalize or replace “faithless electors” who do not vote in line with their state’s popular vote in presidential elections.
B. Gonzales v. Raich
Gonzales v. Raich is a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal power to prohibit local cultivation and use of marijuana under the Commerce Clause, even when states permit it for medical purposes.
C. Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization is the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade and ended the federal constitutional right to abortion.
D. Arizona v. United States
Arizona v. United States is a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited state authority over immigration enforcement by affirming broad federal power in this area.
E. Obergefell v. Hodges
Obergefell v. Hodges is the landmark 2015 U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide by ruling that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry.
F. None of above. chosen
G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.

NED2 Entity disambiguation (via description) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07

Target entity: NFIB v. Sebelius
Target entity description: NFIB v. Sebelius is the landmark 2012 U.S. Supreme Court case that largely upheld the Affordable Care Act, notably ruling that its individual mandate could be sustained under Congress’s taxing power.

A. Chiafalo v. Washington
Chiafalo v. Washington is a 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case that unanimously upheld states’ authority to penalize or replace “faithless electors” who do not vote in line with their state’s popular vote in presidential elections.
B. Gonzales v. Raich
Gonzales v. Raich is a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal power to prohibit local cultivation and use of marijuana under the Commerce Clause, even when states permit it for medical purposes.
C. Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization is the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade and ended the federal constitutional right to abortion.
D. Arizona v. United States
Arizona v. United States is a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited state authority over immigration enforcement by affirming broad federal power in this area.
E. Obergefell v. Hodges
Obergefell v. Hodges is the landmark 2015 U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide by ruling that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry.
F. None of above. chosen

Statements (59)

Predicate	Object
instanceOf	United States Supreme Court case ⓘ landmark case ⓘ
areaOfLaw	constitutional law ⓘ health law ⓘ
chiefJusticeAtDecision	John G. Roberts Jr. ⓘ
citation	567 U.S. 519 ⓘ
commerceClausePluralityBy	John G. Roberts Jr. ⓘ
constitutionalProvisionInterpreted	Commerce Clause ⓘ Necessary and Proper Clause ⓘ Taxing and Spending Clause ⓘ surface form: Spending Clause Taxing and Spending Clause ⓘ
country	United States of America ⓘ surface form: United States
decidingCourt	Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
decisionDate	2012-06-28 ⓘ
dissentingOpinionBy	Anthony M. Kennedy ⓘ Antonin Scalia ⓘ Clarence Thomas ⓘ Samuel A. Alito Jr. ⓘ
docketNumber	11-393 ⓘ 11-398 ⓘ 11-400 ⓘ
effect	largely upheld the Affordable Care Act ⓘ made Medicaid expansion effectively optional for states ⓘ
fullName	NFIB v. Sebelius self-linksurface differs ⓘ surface form: National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius
holding	Anti-Injunction Act does not bar the suit ⓘ Medicaid expansion as enacted is unconstitutionally coercive on the states ⓘ individual mandate exceeds Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause ⓘ individual mandate is a valid exercise of Congress’s taxing power ⓘ remedy for Medicaid expansion is to bar withholding of existing Medicaid funds from nonconsenting states ⓘ
issue	constitutionality of Medicaid expansion provisions ⓘ constitutionality of the individual mandate ⓘ scope of Congress’s Commerce Clause power ⓘ scope of Congress’s Taxing Power ⓘ
joinedInCommerceClausePlurality	Anthony M. Kennedy ⓘ Antonin Scalia ⓘ Clarence Thomas ⓘ Samuel A. Alito Jr. ⓘ
joinedInMedicaidPlurality	Elena Kagan ⓘ Stephen G. Breyer ⓘ
joinedInTaxPowerMajority	Elena Kagan ⓘ John G. Roberts Jr. ⓘ Ruth Bader Ginsburg ⓘ Sonia Sotomayor ⓘ Stephen G. Breyer ⓘ
majorityOpinionBy	John G. Roberts Jr. ⓘ
medicaidOpinionPluralityBy	John G. Roberts Jr. ⓘ
petitioner	National Federation of Independent Business ⓘ States challenging the Affordable Care Act ⓘ
relatedConcept	coercion doctrine in Spending Clause jurisprudence ⓘ federalism ⓘ individual mandate ⓘ shared responsibility payment ⓘ
relatedLegislation	Affordable Care Act ⓘ Affordable Care Act ⓘ surface form: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
respondent	Kathleen Sebelius ⓘ
respondentOffice	United States Secretary of Health and Human Services ⓘ surface form: Secretary of Health and Human Services
separateOpinionBy	Ruth Bader Ginsburg ⓘ Stephen G. Breyer ⓘ
term	October Term 2011 ⓘ

How these facts were elicited

Referenced by (21)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Taxing and Spending Clause → significantCase → NFIB v. Sebelius ⓘ

Printz v. United States → citedIn → NFIB v. Sebelius ⓘ

NFIB v. Sebelius → fullName → NFIB v. Sebelius self-linksurface differs ⓘ