HEALTH CARE AND CONSTITUITION

Order Description
Answer all of the questions below.

(1) What are the three main constitutional questions resolved in the Affordable Care Act case, NFIB v. Sebelius? List them concisely.

For the remainder of this essay, consider Chief Justice Roberts’s opinion for the Court.

(2) How does Roberts answer these three questions? What is his reasoning for each?

(3) Are Roberts’s answers to each of these three questions consistent with relevant cases decided since Wickard v. Filburn (1941)? Discuss each answer (with relevant precedents) in turn, and address the strongest arguments in opposition to your view.

(4) Are Roberts’s answers to these three questions consistent with the Constitution? Is his method of reasoning consistent with the proper role of judges in interpreting the Constitution? Explain your conclusions, and address the strongest arguments in opposition to your view.

Guidelines: Your answer should be double-spaced pages. Use 12 pt. Times New Roman font with 1-inch margins on all sides.
Your answer should do all of the following:
(1) Clearly state your argument in your introduction. You must take a position on the questions you answer.
(2) Accurately state supporting and opposing views as presented in the cases and address them directly.
(3) Show me, don’t tell me. Refer to specific arguments in the text of assigned opinions and articles. Include a citation with the name of the case and page number you mention (Wickard v. Filburn, p. 360; NFIB v. Sebelius, p. 14). If an opinion does not have page numbers, number them yourself beginning with page 1. Your answer should include many case citations.
(4) Have excellent style, organization, grammar and spelling.

HEALTH CARE AND CONSTITUITION

Order Description
Answer all of the questions below.

(1) What are the three main constitutional questions resolved in the Affordable Care Act case, NFIB v. Sebelius? List them concisely.

For the remainder of this essay, consider Chief Justice Roberts’s opinion for the Court.

(2) How does Roberts answer these three questions? What is his reasoning for each?

(3) Are Roberts’s answers to each of these three questions consistent with relevant cases decided since Wickard v. Filburn (1941)? Discuss each answer (with relevant precedents) in turn, and address the strongest arguments in opposition to your view.

(4) Are Roberts’s answers to these three questions consistent with the Constitution? Is his method of reasoning consistent with the proper role of judges in interpreting the Constitution? Explain your conclusions, and address the strongest arguments in opposition to your view.

Guidelines: Your answer should be double-spaced pages. Use 12 pt. Times New Roman font with 1-inch margins on all sides.
Your answer should do all of the following:
(1) Clearly state your argument in your introduction. You must take a position on the questions you answer.
(2) Accurately state supporting and opposing views as presented in the cases and address them directly.
(3) Show me, don’t tell me. Refer to specific arguments in the text of assigned opinions and articles. Include a citation with the name of the case and page number you mention (Wickard v. Filburn, p. 360; NFIB v. Sebelius, p. 14). If an opinion does not have page numbers, number them yourself beginning with page 1. Your answer should include many case citations.
(4) Have excellent style, organization, grammar and spelling.