I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.
This proposed law may violate the due process rights of welfare recipients under Goldberg V Kelly.
BRENNAN, J., Opinion of the Court
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
397 U.S. 254
Goldberg v. Kelly
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
No. 62 Argued: October 13, 1969 --- Decided: March 23, 1970
The question for decision is whether a State that terminates public assistance payments to a particular recipient without affording him the opportunity for an evidentiary hearing prior to termination denies the recipient procedural due process in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The constitutional issue to be decided, therefore, is the narrow one whether the Due Process Clause requires that the recipient he afforded an evidentiary hearing before the termination of benefits. [n7] The District Court held [p261] that only a pre-termination evidentiary hearing would satisfy the constitutional command, and rejected the argument of the state and city officials that the combination of the post-termination "fair hearing" with the informal pre-termination review disposed of all due process claims.
While post-termination review is relevant, there is one overpowering fact which controls here. By hypothesis, a welfare recipient is destitute, without funds or assets. . . . Suffice it to say that to cut off a welfare recipient in the face of . . . "brutal need" without a prior hearing of some sort is unconscionable unless overwhelming considerations justify it.
Welfare recipients must therefore be given an opportunity to confront and cross-examine the witnesses relied on by the department.
Finally, the decisionmaker's conclusion as to a recipient's eligibility must rest solely on the legal rules and evidence adduced at the hearing.