Supreme Court Case Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Supreme Court Case - Research Paper Example The administrative action taken in this case, which consisted of five steps, is described, after which a stand is made that the court’s action had no effect on any perceived arbitrariness in the administrative agency’s decision. This writer’s opinion was rendered on the appropriateness of the court’s decision, and foreseen future implications on administrative actions are briefly described. On the case of Goldberg v Kelly 1. Offer a brief summary/historical overview of the circumstances in the case, the stakeholders, and the outcome sought by the plaintiff. In this case, the appellants were New York state officials and the Commissioner of Social Services, New York City. The appellees are New York City residents who were receiving financial aid under federally supported Aid to Families with Dependent Children program, and the general Home Relief program of New York State (397 U.S. 256). Plaintiff-appellees allege that their benefits either have been or were about to be terminated by officials without prior notice and hearing. They claim in effect, denial of their constitutional right to be afforded the due process of law, for which they sought the restoration of their welfare benefits pending results of evidentiary hearing where they could present their case (397 U.S. 256-257). Upon conclusion of the administrative procedure and remedies during which time plaintiffs’ welfare benefits were terminated, action was brought by the aggrieved party in the District Court for the Southern District of New York. Defendants argued that pursuant to regulation, a pre-termination review was conducted at the end of which it was decided that termination of benefits was warranted. At this juncture, the benefits were halted, although plaintiffs were afforded the option of requesting for a post-termination â€Å"fair hearing† during which they may appear personally before the decision-maker, adduce their evidence and confront and cross-exam ine the witnesses against them. The rationale behind the discontinuance of welfare benefits after the administrative review and summary adjudication prior to the â€Å"fair hearing† was purportedly to protect the interests of the New York taxpayer, in case the hearing finds the discontinuance to be meritorious (397 U.S. 265). The district court ruled in favor of plaintiffs, that in light of the constitutional mandate, a pre-termination evidentiary hearing is required in order to satisfy the due process requisite under the law (397 U.S. 256-257). The District Court rejected the argument by welfare officials that their conduct of a post-termination â€Å"fair hearing† as well as an informal pre-termination review had adequately complied with the law. The decision of the District Court was withheld on appeal. 2. Explain how the case qualified for judicial review in regards to the ripeness, standing, the exhaustion of administrative remedies, and primary jurisdiction as th ey apply. The doctrine of ripeness is concerned with whether at the time a judicial action is brought, the facts have sufficiently developed such that the injury has occurred or is likely to occur, instead of being remote or contingent. A claim is ripe if the injury upon