Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/19-840_6jfm.pdf
Page Number: 8

Cite as:  593 U. S. ____ (2021) 

5 

Opinion of the Court 

(internal  quotation  marks  omitted);  see  also  Lujan  v.  De-
fenders of Wildlife, 504 U. S. 555, 560–561 (1992).  Neither 
the individual nor the state plaintiffs have shown that the 
injury they will suffer or have suffered is “fairly traceable”
to the “allegedly unlawful conduct” of which they complain. 

A 
We begin with the two individual plaintiffs.  They claim
a particularized individual harm in the form of payments
they have made and will make each month to carry the min-
imum essential coverage that §5000A(a) requires.  The in-
dividual plaintiffs point to the statutory language, which,
they say, commands them to buy health insurance.  Brief 
for Respondent-Cross Petitioner Hurley et al. 19–20.  But 
even if we assume that this pocketbook injury satisfies the 
injury element of Article III standing, see Whitmore v. Ar-
kansas, 495 U. S. 149, 155 (1990), the plaintiffs neverthe-
less fail to satisfy the traceability requirement. 

Their problem lies in the fact that the statutory provision, 
while it tells them to obtain that coverage, has no means of 
enforcement.  With the penalty zeroed out, the IRS can no 
longer seek a penalty from those who fail to comply.  See 26 
U. S. C. §5000A(g) (setting out IRS enforcement only of the 
taxpayer’s failure to pay the penalty, not of the taxpayer’s 
failure to maintain minimum essential coverage).  Because 
of this, there is no possible Government action that is caus-
ally connected to the plaintiffs’ injury—the costs of purchas-
ing health insurance.  Or to put the matter conversely, that 
injury  is  not  “fairly  traceable”  to  any  “allegedly  unlawful 
conduct” of which the plaintiffs complain.  Allen v. Wright, 
468  U. S.  737,  751  (1984).    They  have  not  pointed  to  any 
way in which the defendants, the Commissioner of Internal
Revenue and the Secretary of Health and Human Services,
will act to enforce §5000A(a).  They have not shown how any 
other federal employees could do so either.  In a word, they