The Role of the Courts in Securing Welfare Rights and ...

Welfare Law Centeran opportunity to be heard. Lawlessness, arbitrariness, and indeed vindictiveness have too oftenmarred welfare administration and, following the adoption of the PRA, are likely to increase.Many of the more arbitrary practices by state and local entities are likely to run afoul ofthe due process clauses of the federal and state constitution. For a court to find that a dueprocess violation has occurred, the court must be satisfied that the aggrieved person has aproperty right to the benefit at risk.In its landmark decision in Goldberg v. Kelly, 84 an early Welfare Law Center case, theU.S. Supreme Court held that advance notice and opportunity for a hearing had to be providedbefore welfare benefits could be terminated. The Court found that state law defining who waseligible for the benefits created a statutory entitlement for eligible claimants, and that thisentitlement was a “property interest” protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. This decisionled to significant improvements in welfare administration.Both the federal welfare reform statute and many state implementing plans provide thatthere is no longer an entitlement to public assistance. Because the issue of whether there is anentitlement is crucial to determining whether due process rights still exist, courts will first have todetermine whether there is a property right to the benefits at issue. Arguments that states cannotstrip recipients of due process rights by merely stating that there is “no entitlement” will rely onCleveland Bd. of Education v. Loudermill, 85 which held that if a statute creates a propertyinterest, the due process clause, not the statute, determines what process is due when thatproperty interest is compromised.Once a right to due process has been established, much of the litigation will focus on whatthe state or locality must do to protect the rights of the welfare recipient or applicant. There hasbeen relatively little litigation filed. However, patterns have emerged that lead us to believe thatthe following represent the types of issues over which litigation will most likely arise.Standardless decision making and inconsistent administration. The greatest erosionin fairness has occurred in the administration of TANF programs. Far too many states areoperating their TANF programs with insufficient standards and inadequate oversight of the workMay 1999⋅ 32 ⋅