57 pages. "[The two individual plaintiffs] do not have standing to challenge Section 5000A(a)'s minimum essential coverage provision because they have not shown a past or future injury fairly traceable to defendants' conduct enforcing the specific statutory provision they attack as unconstitutional.... The States, like the individual plaintiffs, have failed to show how that alleged harm is traceable to the Government's actual or possible action in enforcing Section 5000A(a), so they lack Article III standing as a matter of law. But the States have also not shown that the challenged minimum essential coverage provision, without any prospect of penalty, will injure them by leading more individuals to enroll in these programs." [Excerpt from the syllabus provided by the court.] [California v. Texas, No. 19-840 (S. Ct. Jun. 17, 2021)]