The Supreme Struggle: 'Obamacare' and the New Limits of Federal Regulation Case Solution And Analysis, HBR Case Study Solution & Analysis of Harvard Case Studies

Home >> Human Resource Cases >> The Supreme Struggle: ‘Obamacare’ and the New Limits of Federal Regulation

On June 28, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected legal challenges to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, commonly known as 'Obamacare,' by a vote of 5-4. In National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012), a majority of the justices affirmed Congress's power to expand Medicaid and demand an individual mandate requiring people to get health insurance or face raising tax penalties.

The decision of the Court was widely condemned as a dramatic expansion of national power that threatened individual freedom and state sovereignty. The Court was greatly criticized for betraying the principles of federalism and limited government in the U.S. Constitution. The harshest criticism was reserved for Chief Justice John Roberts, a Republican appointee who-- though considered a conservative justice--authored the Court's opinion and cast the crucial deciding vote to uphold the Act. In reality, far from radically expanding national power, the Court's conclusion placed groundbreaking limits on Congress's power to regulate trade and use federal funds to force states into doing its bidding.

These facets of the Court's conclusion received less attention in the popular media, but might actually prove to possess a more critical impact on the extent of federal regulation in the foreseeable future. This installment of Business Law & Ethics Corner describes how those aspects of the Court's determination place new limits on the character and extent of national regulation.

The Supreme Struggle 'Obamacare' and the New Limits of Federal Regulation Case Study Solution

PUBLICATION DATE: November 15, 2013 PRODUCT #: BH576-PDF-ENG

This is just an excerpt. This case is about LEADERSHIP & MANAGING PEOPLE