Goldberg v. Kelly

397 U. S. 254 (1970), argued 13 Oct. 1969, decided 23 Mar. 1970 by vote of 6 to 3; Brennan for the Court; black, Burger, Stewart in dissent. The procedure in New York City for the termination of welfare payments required seven‐day notice and gave the welfare recipient the right to submit a written statement of protest. It did not, however, afford an evidentiary hearing before termination of benefits. The Court held that procedural due process under the Fourteenth Amendment required that welfare recipients be afforded an evidentiary hearing before termination of benefits.

The right to submit only a written statement, or affording a post‐termination evidentiary hearing, did not meet requirements of due process. The pretermination hearing need not be, however, in the nature of a judicial or quasi‐judicial trial. But the recipient must be afforded an opportunity to confront and cross‐examine witnesses, to retain an attorney if so desired, and to present oral evidence to an impartial decision maker, whose conclusion must rest solely on legal rules and evidence adduced at the hearing.

While the state has an interest in conserving fiscal and administrative resources, this interest is outweighed by the interest of the recipient in uninterrupted receipt of public assistance, which is not mere charity but a means to promote the general welfare. The governmental interests that prompt the provision of welfare prompt as well its uninterrupted provision to those eligible to receive it. Welfare benefits, the Court said, “are a matter of statutory entitlement for persons qualified to receive them” (p. 262). The Court thus injected the concept of “entitlement” into the concept of property right protected by the Due Process Clause.

— Milton R. Konvitz

Goldberg v. Kelly
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued October 13, 1969 Decided March 23, 1970
Full case name	Goldberg, Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York v. Kelly, et al.
Citations	397 U.S. 254 (more) 90 S. Ct. 1011; 25 L. Ed. 2d 287; 1970 U.S. LEXIS 80
Prior history	Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
Holding
The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires a full evidentiary hearing before a recipient of certain government benefits is deprived of such benefits.
Court membership
Chief Justice Warren E. Burger Associate Justices Hugo Black · William O. Douglas John M. Harlan II · William J. Brennan, Jr. Potter Stewart · Byron White Thurgood Marshall
Case opinions
Majority	Brennan, joined by Douglas, Harlan, White, Marshall
Dissent	Burger
Dissent	Stewart
Dissent	Black
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. XIV

Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970), is a case in which the United States Supreme Court ruled that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires an evidentiary hearing before a recipient of certain government benefits (welfare) is deprived of such benefits. The individual losing benefits is not entitled to a trial, but is entitled to an oral hearing before an impartial decision-maker, the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses, and the right to a written opinion setting out the evidence relied upon and the legal basis for the decision. ^[1]

Contents 1 Decision 2 See also 3 References 4 External links

Decision

The Goldberg decision set the parameters for procedural due process when dealing with the deprivation of a government benefit or entitlement. The Court held that a person has a property interest in certain government entitlements, which require notice and a hearing before a governmental entity (either state or federal) takes them away. Government-provided entitlements from the modern welfare state increased substantially in the United States during the 20th century. The Goldberg court decided that such entitlements (e.g., welfare payments, government pensions, professional licenses), are a form of "new property" that require pre-deprivation procedural protection, doing away with the traditional distinction between rights and privileges.

This specific case dealt with 20 individuals who had been suspected of welfare fraud by New York City officials and were then denied municipal benefits.^[1] The opinion of the Court was delivered by Justice William Brennan, while dissenting opinions were filed by Justices Hugo Black and Potter Stewart and Chief Justice Warren Burger. Brennan said at his retirement that he considered it the most important case he'd ever decided; conservative columnist David Frum once opined that the case was a major factor in New York City's 1975 budget meltdown.^{[1] [1]}

See also

• List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 397
• Administrative Procedure Act
• Due Process
• Redistributive change

References

1. ^ ^{a b c d} Frum, David (2000). How We Got Here: The '70s. New York, New York: Basic Books. pp. 228-229. ISBN 0465041957. 

External links

• Text of Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970) is available from:  · Enfacto · Findlaw

This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)