Goldberg v. Kelly
| Goldberg v. Kelly | |
|---|---|
 | |
| 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 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | 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 | |
| |
| 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]
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] David Frum calls the case a milestone towards New York City's 1975 budget meltdown.[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.[1]
See also
- List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 397
- Administrative Procedure Act
- Due Process
- Redistributive change
References
- ^ a b c d Frum, David (2000). How We Got Here: The '70s. New York, New York: Basic Books. pp. 228–229. ISBN 0465041957.
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|coauthors=(help)
External links
- Text of Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970) is available from: Findlaw
 | This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |