Goldberg v. Kelly
Citation: 397 U.S. 254 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1970)
Facts
New York City terminated welfare benefits for several recipients without providing a hearing before termination. Recipients could request a hearing after termination, but in the interim they received no benefits. Kelly and other recipients argued that the termination without a prior hearing violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Issue
Does the Due Process Clause require that a welfare recipient be given an evidentiary hearing before the government terminates their benefits?
Holding
The Supreme Court held, 5-3, that due process requires an evidentiary hearing prior to the termination of welfare benefits. The Court reasoned that welfare benefits are a matter of statutory entitlement for those who qualify, and the recipient’s interest in continued benefits and ability to survive pending a post-termination hearing is so substantial that termination without a prior hearing is unconstitutional.
Rule
Before the government terminates a statutory entitlement (such as welfare benefits) upon which the recipient is dependent for basic subsistence, due process requires that the recipient be afforded an opportunity for a pre-termination evidentiary hearing, including notice of the grounds for termination and a chance to respond orally.
Significance
Goldberg v. Kelly is the foundational case for due process protection of government benefits. It recognized welfare as a “new property” interest entitled to constitutional protection — a dramatic expansion of due process beyond traditional real and personal property. The decision is the starting point for the modern procedural due process framework and is directly limited and refined by Mathews v. Eldridge, which established a three-factor balancing test to determine what process is due, rejecting Goldberg’s categorical requirement of pre-termination hearings for all benefit terminations.