2008
Αποτελέσματα Αναζήτησης
Sebelius was the centerpoint of the third legal challenge to the ACA to reach the Supreme Court in California v. Texas, heard in the 2020–21 term. In 2017, Congress passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act that reduced the health insurance requirement of the ACA to $0 from 2019 onward, effectively eliminating the individual mandate.
In the general election, Sebelius's platform included promises to protect school budgets from budget cuts, not to raise taxes, and to completely review and overhaul the state government. [5] Sebelius raised $4 million for the campaign, a Kansas state fundraising record. [5]
26 Μαρ 2012 · Chief Justice Roberts, joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, concluded that the Individual Mandate penalty is a tax for the purposes of the Constitution's Taxing and Spending Clause and is a valid exercise of Congressional authority.
28 Ιουν 2012 · The Act provides that the penalty will be paid to the Internal Revenue Service with an individual’s taxes, and “shall be assessed and collected in the same manner” as tax penalties, such as the penalty for claiming too large an income tax refund.
The lawsuit challenged the Affordable Care Act on the grounds that the individual health insurance mandate exceeded Congress' authority to regulate interstate commerce under the Commerce Clause of Article I and did not fall within its power to tax.
This case is the most important of the Supreme Court’s recent cases expounding on Congress’s powers to regulate interstate commerce and to tax and spend. At issue are two provisions of the Affordable Care Act.
The Court held that the penalty was still a valid tax because the Constitution did not forbid taxing omissions, the taxing power is limited, and the taxing power does not give Congress as much power to control individual behavior as the commerce power does.
