Sissel v. United States Department of Health & Human Services was a lawsuit filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation as a constitutional challenge to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA).

The plaintiffs claimed that the ACA's enactment violated the Origination Clause of the Constitution.

[1][2] The suit also sought clarification from the District Court as to what extent lower courts were legally bound by the conclusion of Chief Justice Roberts and the four dissenting justices that the Act did not pass constitutional scrutiny by way of the Commerce Clause and Necessary and Proper Clause.

The Court also rejected Sissel's contention that the law violated the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, stating that the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in 2012 in the case of NFIB v. Sebelius "necessarily disposes of Sissel's Commerce Clause claim.

The judges wrote an opinion dissenting from the denial of rehearing and on the merits of Sissel's claim.