Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/20-303_6khn.pdf
Page Number: 1

(Slip Opinion) 

OCTOBER  TERM,  2021 

1 

Syllabus 

NOTE:  Where  it  is  feasible,  a  syllabus  (headnote)  will  be  released,  as  is 
being  done  in  connection  with  this  case,  at  the  time  the  opinion  is  issued. 
The  syllabus  constitutes  no  part  of  the  opinion  of  the  Court  but  has  been 
prepared  by  the  Reporter  of  Decisions  for  the  convenience  of  the  reader. 
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

Syllabus 

UNITED STATES v. VAELLO MADERO 

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR 
THE FIRST CIRCUIT 

No. 20–303.  Argued November 9, 2021—Decided April 21, 2022 

The  Territory  Clause  of  the  United  States  Constitution—which  states 
that Congress may “make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting
the Territory . . . belonging to the United States,” Art. IV, §3, cl. 2—
affords Congress broad authority to legislate with respect to the U. S. 
Territories.    In  exercising  that  authority,  Congress  has  long  main-
tained different federal tax and benefits programs for residents of the 
Territories than for residents of the 50 States.  For example, residents 
of Puerto Rico are typically exempt from most federal income, gift, es-
tate, and excise taxes.  See 48 U. S. C. §734; see, e.g.,  26 U. S. C. §§933, 
2209, 4081–4084.  But just as not every federal tax extends to residents
of  Puerto  Rico,  so  too  not  every  federal  benefits  program  extends  to
residents of Puerto Rico.  One such benefits program is Supplemental
Security Income (SSI), which by statute applies only to residents of the 
50 States and the District of Columbia.  42 U. S. C. §1382c(a)(1)(B)(i).
The question presented is whether the equal-protection component of
the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause requires Congress to make 
Supplemental  Security  Income  benefits  available  to  residents  of 
Puerto  Rico  to  the  same  extent  that  Congress  makes  those  benefits
available to residents of the States. 

Here,  respondent  Jose  Luis  Vaello  Madero  received  SSI  benefits 
while he was a resident of New York.  He then moved to Puerto Rico, 
where he was no longer eligible to receive those benefits.  Unaware of 
Vaello Madero’s new residence, the Government continued to pay him 
SSI benefits.  The Government eventually sued Vaello Madero to re-
cover those errant payments, which totaled more than $28,000.  In re-
sponse,  Vaello  Madero  invoked  the  Constitution,  arguing  that  Con-
gress’s  exclusion  of  residents  of  Puerto  Rico  from  the  SSI  program 
violated  the  equal-protection  component  of  the  Fifth  Amendment’s