Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
D.C. Circuit· 11/8/2011

Seven-Sky v. Holder

Citations

  • 661 F.3d 1
  • 398 U.S. App. D.C. 134
  • 53 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1993
  • 108 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 7074
  • 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 22566
  • 2011 WL 5378319

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • noting the Government’s inability to “identify any mandate to purchase a product or service in interstate commerce that would be unconstitutional” under its theory of the commerce power
  • noting “the bedrock principle of judicial restraint that courts avoid prematurely or unnecessarily deciding constitutional questions”
  • directing 4 courts to use these factors to determine whether good cause exists to maintain confidentiality 5 designations
  • “[T]he aim of the shared responsibility payment is to encourage everyone to purchase insurance; the goal is universal coverage, not revenues from penalties.”
  • “[T]he aim of the shared responsibility payment is to encourage everyone to purchase insurance; the goal is universal coverage, not revenues from penalties.”
  • “[E]very federal court must satisfy itself of its own subject matter jurisdiction[.]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Edwards, Kavanaugh, Silberman

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

25 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

123 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Seven-Sky v. Holder

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.