34 Cited authorities

Steel Co. v. Citizens for Better Env't
523 U.S. 83 (1998) Cited 10,829 times 15 Legal Analyses
Holding that a court "act ultra vires" when it assumes "hypothetical jurisdiction" in order to rule on the merits
Warth v. Seldin
422 U.S. 490 (1975) Cited 11,929 times 14 Legal Analyses
Holding that Article III requires plaintiffs "to establish that, in fact, the asserted injury was the consequence of the defendants' actions"
Raines v. Byrd
521 U.S. 811 (1997) Cited 1,778 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding specifically and only that "individual members of Congress [lack] Article III standing"
Nat'l Fed'n of Indep. Bus. v. Sebelius
567 U.S. 519 (2012) Cited 962 times 67 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 was not a valid exercise of the Commerce Clause power after focusing solely on whether it regulated "economic activity" without discussing the remaining Morrison factors
Buckley v. Valeo
424 U.S. 1 (1976) Cited 3,422 times 37 Legal Analyses
Holding that a public financing law does not "abridge, restrict, or censor" expression
King v. Burwell
574 U.S. 988 (2015) Cited 677 times 40 Legal Analyses
Holding that Congress did not delegate health insurance policy to Internal Revenue Service
Mohawk Indus., Inc. v. Carpenter
558 U.S. 100 (2009) Cited 770 times 17 Legal Analyses
Holding that, although a privilege interest is certainly important, it can effectively be reviewed on direct appeal without resorting to the collateral-order doctrine to bypass the final-judgment rule
Swint v. Chambers County Comm'n
514 U.S. 35 (1995) Cited 1,107 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that a denial of a motion for summary judgment on a Monell claim is not appealable under the collateral order doctrine because the defendant's argument would amount to a "mere defense to liability" that could be "reviewed effectively on appeal from final judgment"
Office of Personnel Management v. Richmond
496 U.S. 414 (1990) Cited 796 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that "judicial use of the equitable doctrine of estoppel cannot grant . . . a money remedy that Congress has not authorized"
Ariz. State Legislature v. Ariz. Indep. Redistricting Comm'n
576 U.S. 787 (2015) Cited 276 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a claim that a proposition interfered with the Legislature's constitutionally vested power over redistricting established standing
Section 1292 - Interlocutory decisions
28 U.S.C. § 1292 Cited 22,374 times 196 Legal Analyses
Granting appellate jurisdiction over certain types of interlocutory orders
Section 702 - Right of review
5 U.S.C. § 702 Cited 7,098 times 24 Legal Analyses
Granting judicial review of "agency action"
Section 4980H - Shared responsibility for employers regarding health coverage
26 U.S.C. § 4980H Cited 116 times 46 Legal Analyses
Establishing an employer mandate
Section 36B - Refundable credit for coverage under a qualified health plan
26 U.S.C. § 36B Cited 80 times 35 Legal Analyses
Providing premium tax credits to make health insurance plans, including employer-sponsored plans, more affordable
Section 1301 - Application
31 U.S.C. § 1301 Cited 61 times 2 Legal Analyses
Stating that "[a]ppropriations shall be applied only to the objects for which the appropriations were made except as otherwise provided by law"
Section 18082 - Advance determination and payment of premium tax credits and cost-sharing reductions
42 U.S.C. § 18082 Cited 25 times
Codifying ACA section 1412
Section 18023 - Special rules
42 U.S.C. § 18023 Cited 19 times 3 Legal Analyses
Prohibiting use of the Act's cost-sharing reduction or tax credits for abortion coverage
Section 18071 - Reduced cost-sharing for individuals enrolling in qualified health plans
42 U.S.C. § 18071 Cited 16 times 5 Legal Analyses
Cost-sharing reduction
Section 1324 - Refund of internal revenue collections
31 U.S.C. § 1324 Cited 11 times 5 Legal Analyses
Providing for the appropriation of "[n]ecessary amounts . . . for refunding internal revenue collections"

United States House of Representatives v. Burwell et al

34 Cited authorities

Holding that a court "act ultra vires" when it assumes "hypothetical jurisdiction" in order to rule on the merits

Holding that Article III requires plaintiffs "to establish that, in fact, the asserted injury was the consequence of the defendants' actions"

Holding specifically and only that "individual members of Congress [lack] Article III standing"

Holding that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 was not a valid exercise of the Commerce Clause power after focusing solely on whether it regulated "economic activity" without discussing the remaining Morrison factors

Holding that a public financing law does not "abridge, restrict, or censor" expression

Holding that Congress did not delegate health insurance policy to Internal Revenue Service

Holding that, although a privilege interest is certainly important, it can effectively be reviewed on direct appeal without resorting to the collateral-order doctrine to bypass the final-judgment rule

Holding that a denial of a motion for summary judgment on a Monell claim is not appealable under the collateral order doctrine because the defendant's argument would amount to a "mere defense to liability" that could be "reviewed effectively on appeal from final judgment"

Holding that "judicial use of the equitable doctrine of estoppel cannot grant . . . a money remedy that Congress has not authorized"

Holding that a claim that a proposition interfered with the Legislature's constitutionally vested power over redistricting established standing

Granting appellate jurisdiction over certain types of interlocutory orders

Granting judicial review of "agency action"

Establishing an employer mandate

Providing premium tax credits to make health insurance plans, including employer-sponsored plans, more affordable

Stating that "[a]ppropriations shall be applied only to the objects for which the appropriations were made except as otherwise provided by law"

Codifying ACA section 1412

Prohibiting use of the Act's cost-sharing reduction or tax credits for abortion coverage

Cost-sharing reduction

Providing for the appropriation of "[n]ecessary amounts . . . for refunding internal revenue collections"