DANDRIDGE V. WILLIAMS
397 U.S. 471 (1970)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was an appeal challenging the constitutional validity of state restrictions on welfare benefits under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
FACTS: A Maryland statute imposed a $250 per month limit per family on AFDC benefits. The maximum benefit is the minimum income earned by the working poor. The state justifies its provision based on three factors: 1) to encourage employment; 2) to maintain balance between welfare earners and wage earners; 3) to provide incentives for family planning; 4) to apportion benefits to serve all of its constituents' needs. Families with large households challenged the provision, asserting that the law discriminated based on family size in prohibition of the Equal Protection of the Fourteenth Amendment. The District Court held in favor of welfare recipients. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND
DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
No comments:
Post a Comment