Mathews V. Eldridge Case Summary
Mathews v. Eldridge
James Schwerner
FIRAC
Facts: Title II of the Social Security Act provides cash benefits to disabled workers. A man by the name of Eldridge was awarded these benefits in June of 1968. Eldridge stayed on this benefit plan until March of 1972 when he received a questionnaire regarding the current state of his medical condition. Eldridge claims that he had filled out the questionnaire conveying the fact that he was still in need of the benefits that he was entitled to; however the state agency ceased his benefits when Eldridge returned his completed questionnaire. Upon notification of the terminated benefits, Eldridge immediately challenged whether this act was constitutional or not. Eldridge was ultimately inspired to make this claim because of the results of a similar case known as Goldberg v. Kelly, which involved the termination of welfare.
Issue: As stated in the actual case, “The issue in this case is whether the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment requires that prior to the termination of …show more content…
They even looked at the case that inspired Eldridge to question whether or not his situation was constitutional. As mentioned above, this case was known as Goldberg v. Kelly and it established the right to an “evidentiary hearing” when welfare was going to be terminated. The major difference that the court spotted was that the Goldberg case involved welfare, which is not quite the same thing as disability pay. When a person is on welfare, they are economically stable on that welfare. This is not necessarily the case when a person collects disability benefits. The court stated that “…disabled worker’s need is likely to be less than that of a welfare recipient.” The court also came to the conclusion that the disability benefit protocol is sufficient and would not need a due process because it already verifies if the recipient is eligible and in need for these
James Schwerner
FIRAC
Facts: Title II of the Social Security Act provides cash benefits to disabled workers. A man by the name of Eldridge was awarded these benefits in June of 1968. Eldridge stayed on this benefit plan until March of 1972 when he received a questionnaire regarding the current state of his medical condition. Eldridge claims that he had filled out the questionnaire conveying the fact that he was still in need of the benefits that he was entitled to; however the state agency ceased his benefits when Eldridge returned his completed questionnaire. Upon notification of the terminated benefits, Eldridge immediately challenged whether this act was constitutional or not. Eldridge was ultimately inspired to make this claim because of the results of a similar case known as Goldberg v. Kelly, which involved the termination of welfare.
Issue: As stated in the actual case, “The issue in this case is whether the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment requires that prior to the termination of …show more content…
They even looked at the case that inspired Eldridge to question whether or not his situation was constitutional. As mentioned above, this case was known as Goldberg v. Kelly and it established the right to an “evidentiary hearing” when welfare was going to be terminated. The major difference that the court spotted was that the Goldberg case involved welfare, which is not quite the same thing as disability pay. When a person is on welfare, they are economically stable on that welfare. This is not necessarily the case when a person collects disability benefits. The court stated that “…disabled worker’s need is likely to be less than that of a welfare recipient.” The court also came to the conclusion that the disability benefit protocol is sufficient and would not need a due process because it already verifies if the recipient is eligible and in need for these