Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970) The Last Gasp of Liberal United States Supreme Court Due Process Jurisprudence.
Download ReportTranscript Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970) The Last Gasp of Liberal United States Supreme Court Due Process Jurisprudence.
Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970) The Last Gasp of Liberal United States Supreme Court Due Process Jurisprudence
1
Learning Objectives
Learn how the status of the affected persons can change the nature of the due process needed for fundamental fairness Learn how increasing due process rights can have unintended consequences in a program with limited resources
2
The pre-1996 Welfare System
What is the general attitude toward people on Welfare?
How was this reflected in the administration of the welfare programs?
What was AFDC?
What were the unintended consequences of the welfare system?
How is this driving the health care debate?
3
Supreme Court Context
Earl Warren
Appointed Chief Justice in 1953 - by which president?
What was Warren's background?
Served until 1969 What was the jurisprudential shift on the United States Supreme Court in the 1950s and 1960s?
Who became Chief Justice after Earl Warren?
4
Facts of the Case
What state did this case arise in?
What program was providing benefits to the plaintiffs?
What was the economic status of plaintiffs?
How does this complicate their effectively asserting their legal rights?
Why did this result in the right to appointed counsel for indigent criminal defendants?
5
Statutory Entitlements
What makes a benefit an entitlement?
What is a matrix regulation?
6
Matrix Regulation Test 1 Test 2 Claimant Status Income less than $3000 for family of 2 Assets less than $2000 Income less than $6000 for family of 4 Head of household is disabled x x
7
Pre-Goldberg: Post vs Pre-Deprivation Due Process
What was the administrative process that plaintiffs were contesting?
What do you think is the relationship between the agency personnel and the plaintiffs?
What were the problems with the informal system of reevaluating beneficiaries status?
What was the impact on plaintiffs of terminating benefits?
How does this further complicate post-deprivation hearing rights?
8
Why a Hearing?
Why couldn't plaintiff hire an attorney and file a written response to the termination letter?
What could she do at a hearing that she could not do in writing?
Why wasn't a post-termination hearing enough?
Why didn't the state want to give everyone a hearing?
9
Goldberg Rights - I
1) timely and adequate notice
2) oral presentation of arguments
3) oral presentation of evidence
4) confronting adverse witnesses 5) cross-examination of adverse witnesses
10
Goldberg Rights - II
6) disclosure to the claimant of opposing evidence 7) the right to retain an attorney (no appointed counsel) 8) a determination on the record of the hearing 9) record of reasons and evidence relied on; and 10) an impartial decision maker
11
Administrative Costs of Goldberg
What does granting these hearings do to the cost of removing someone from welfare?
What does it do to the balance of benefits costs to administration costs?
What does this do to the global cost of the benefits system?
12
Short-Term Impact of Goldberg
How does raising the administrative costs affect new claims for welfare?
What is the incentive for the welfare officers under the Goldberg ruling?
What expectation does it create for welfare recipients? What long term problem did this contribute to?
Moynihan and Benign Neglect
13
Why Administrative Due Process is Not Liberal or Conservative
Conservatives
Want the little man (and the rich man) to be fairly treated by the government, i.e., to be able to resist regulation Liberals
Want the individual to get lots of due process, and cannot exclude corporations Both think the government losing against individuals is good
14
Fixing Welfare - The 1996 Act
Who pushed for welfare reform?
Who signed it?
What is the new name for AFDC?
TANF - Temporary assistance for Needy Families What does the name change tell you about the change in philosophy?
How long do you get on the program?
How does this affect future Goldberg actions?
Will there be facts in dispute?
15
The Subsequent History of Goldberg
Never overruled Superseded by Matthews Ultimately limited to its specific facts Unfortunately, many public health scholars did not notice then and have argued that all deprivations that affect individuals should have pre-deprivation process.
16