Document: 403 U.S. 365 91 S.Ct. 1848 29 L.Ed.2d 534 John O. GRAHAM, Commissioner, Department of Public Welfare, State Arizona, Appellant,v.Carmen RICHARDSON, Etc. William P. SAILER et al., Appellants, v. Elsie Mary Jane LEGER and Beryl Jervis. Nos. 609, 727. Argued March 22, 1971. Decided June 14, Syllabus statutes, like the Arizona Pennsylvania statutes here involved, that deny welfare benefits to resident aliens or who have not resided in United States for a specified number years are violative Equal Protection Clause encroach upon exclusive federal power over entrance residence aliens; there is no authorization Arizona's 15-year durational residency requirement § 1402(b) Social Security Act. Pp. 370—383. 313 F.Supp. 34 321 250, affirmed. Michael S. Flam, Phoenix, Ariz., appellant Graham. Joseph Work appellants Sailer others. Anthony B. Ching, Cambridge, Mass., appellee Carmen Richardson. Jonathan M. Stein, Philadelphia, Pa., appellees Leger Jervis pro hac vice, by special leave Court. Mr. Justice BLACKMUN delivered opinion 1 These cases. They provide yet another aspect widening litigation this area.1 The issue whether Fourteenth Amendment prevents from conditioning either (a) beneficiary's possession citizenship, (b) if beneficiary an alien, his having country years. facts dispute. 2 * No. 609. This case, concerns State's participation categorical assistance programs. programs originate with Act 1935, 49 Stat. 620, as amended, 42 U.S.C., c. 7. supported part grants-in-aid administered under guidelines. Rev.Stat.Ann., Tit. 46, Art. 2, provides persons permanently totally disabled (APTD). See U.S.C. §§ 1351 1355. Rev.Stat.Ann. 46—233 (Supp.1970—1971), amended 1962, reads: 3 'A. No person shall be entitled general does meet maintain following requirements: 4 '1. Is citizen States, has total fifteen *' 5 A eligibility provision conditioned citizenship appears 46—252(2), providing old-age assistance, 46—272(4), needy blind. 1201—1206, 1381—1385. 6 Appellee Richardson, at institution suit July 1969, was 64 age. She lawfully admitted alien. emigrated Mexico 1956 since then continuously Arizona. became disabled. also met all other requirements APTD except 46—233(a)(1). applied but denied relief solely because provision. 7 Mrs. Richardson instituted her class action2 District against Commissioner Welfare seeking declaratory relief, injunction enforcement 46— 233(A)(1), 46—252(2) AND THE award amounts allegedly due. claimed alien violate constitutional right travel; they conflict thus overborne Supremacy Clause; regulation been pre-empted Congress. 8 three-judge court upheld Richardson's motion summary judgment on equal protection grounds. Graham, (Ariz. 1970). It did so reliance Court's opinions Takahashi Fish & Game Comm'n, 334 410, 68 1138, 92 L.Ed. 1478 (1948), Shapiro Thompson, 394 618, 89 1322, 22 600 (1969). appealed. stayed parties plaintiff than Probable jurisdiction noted. 400 956, 353, 27 264 (1970). 9 Pennsylvania, portion program federally supported. relevant statute 432(2) Code, Pa.Stat.Ann., 62, (1968),3 originally enacted 1939. those eligible (1) qualify (2) citizens States. Assistance latter group funded wholly Commonwealth. 10 born Scotland 1937. came 1965 age 28 contract domestic service family Havertown. taxpaying In 1967 she left employment accept more remunerative work Philadelphia. entered into common-law marriage citizen. 1969 illness forced both husband give up their employment. public assistance. Each ineligible Leger, however, qualified aid state program. Aid alienage. monthly grant less amount determined authorities necessary minimum standard living Philadelphia two. 11 action4 Eastern Executive Director County Board Secretary Commonwealth's Welfare. sought restriction 432(2), ordering back payments wrongfully withheld. obtained temporary restraining order preventing defendants continuing began receive, still receives, husband, grant. 12 added party action. Panama 1912 country. 1968, 55, undertake After working approximately one year, other, remunerative, city. February 1970 aid. However, assisted Her immediate through denied. 13 stipulated 'the denial General otherwise such causes undue hardship them depriving means secure necessities life, including food, clothing shelter,' bar receipt discourages continued indigent remove which will needs.' 14 court, judge dissenting, ruled enjoined its further enforcement. Sailer, 250 (ED Pa.1970). 355, 264. II 15 argue initially consistent Clause, may favor distribution benefits. said distinction involves 'invidious discrimination' condemned King Smith, 392 309, 88 2128, 20 1118 (1968), discriminating respect race nationality. 16 provides, '(N)or any deprive liberty, property, without due process law; nor within laws.' long settled, it disputed here, term 'person' context encompasses well entitles laws reside. Yick Wo Hopkins, 118 356, 369, 1064, 1070, 30 220 (1886); Truax Raich, 239 33, 39, 36 7, 9, 60 131 (1915); U.S., 420, S.Ct., 1143. Nor question create two classes persons, indistinguishable Otherwise regard length national residency, must lived unable benefits, state-supported precluded 17 Under traditional principles, retains broad discretion classify classification reasonable basis. Lindsley Natural Carbonic Gas Co., 61, 78, 31 337, 340, 55L.Ed. 369 (1911); Williamson Lee Optical 348 483, 489, 75 461, 465, 99 563 (1955); Morey Doud, 354 457, 77 1344, 1350, 1485 (1957); McGowan Maryland, 366 425—427, 81 1101, 1106, 393 (1961). area economics social welfare.' Dandridge Williams, 397 471, 485, 90 1153, 1161, 25 491 But decisions established classifications based alienage, nationality5 race,6 inherently suspect subject close judicial scrutiny. Aliens prime example 'discrete insular' minority (see Carolene Products 304 144, 152—153, n. 4, 58 778, 783—784, 82 1234 (1938)) whom heightened solicitude appropriate. Accordingly, Takahashi, 1143, apply exclusively inhabitants confined narrow limits.' 18 seek justify restrictions basis 'special interest' favoring own limited resources true Court occasion treat noncitizens differently, ground were protect interests citizens. Thus, (1915), Court, striking down restricting aliens, emphasized '(t)he discrimination defined act pertain domain, common property people state, enjoyment states.' 39—40, 10. And Crane New York, 195, 85, 218 affirmed People Crane, 214 N.Y. 154, 108 N.E. 427 upholding York prohibiting works projects. court's contained Cardozo's wellknown observation: 19 'To disqualify indeed, arbitrary discrimination, principle exclusion advancement profit members state. Ungenerous unwise be. reason unlawful. determining what use made moneys, legitimately consult citizens, rather aliens. Whatever privilege, right, dependent citizenship. war poverty, required dedicate alike.' N.Y., 161, 164, N.E., 429, 430. Heim McCall, 175, 206 Ohio ex rel. Clarke Deckebach, 274 392, 47 630, 71 1115 (1927). On same theory, that, absence overriding treaties, limit engage exploitation natural resources,7 restrict devolution real aliens,8 acquire land.9 21 cast doubt validity public-interest doctrine contexts. There held California's purported ownership fish ocean off shores interest would making fishing waters while permitting others do so. said: 'The adopted authority embody policy abide 'in state' equality legal privileges nondiscriminatory 23 contemporary vitality contexts after we conclude desire preserve inadequate Pennsylvania's longtime First, heavily grounded notion '(w)hatever citizenship.' now rejected concept rights turn governmental benefit characterized 'right' 'privilege.' Sherbert Verner, 374 398, 404, 83 1790, 1794, 965 (1963); 627 6, 1327; Goldberg Kelly, 254, 262, 1011, 1017, 287 (1970); Bell Burson, 402 535, 539, 1586, 1589, (1971). Second, recognized Shapiro: 24 '(A) valid preserving fiscal integrity attempt expenditures, education, accomplish purpose invidious distinctions between saving costs cannot classification.' 633, 1330. Since purposes, concern compelling justification questioned these cases Shapiro. 26 application arguing travel, relied decision, extends only While many speak terms 'citizens' travel,10 source travel never ascribed particular 630 8, 1329; Guest, 383 745, 757—758, 86 1170, 1177—1178, (1966). decided applies specifically unnecessary reach here. enough say involved subjected strict scrutiny test, criterion race, nationality, impinged fundamental interstate movement. As there, waiting-period denies applicants recently moved jurisdiction. moving Columbia exercising serves penalize exercise unless shown promote interest, unconstitutional.' 634, 1331. instant cases, hand, therefore impaired. Appellants' attempted (1970), misplaced, case (family size) neither employed criterion. We agree 'justification limiting expenses particularly inappropriate unreasonable when discriminated consists pay taxes called armed forces. Unlike short-term residents Shapiro, live years, contribute economic growth state.' F.Supp., 253. Purdy Fitzpatrick California, Cal.2d 566, 581—582, 79 Cal.Rptr. 77, 456 P.2d 645, 656 can tax revenues contributed State. hold Clause. III An additional why withstand emerges federal-state relations. National Government 'broad powers period remain, conduct before naturalization, conditions naturalization.' 419, 1142; Hines Davidowitz, 312 52, 66, 61 399, 403, 85 581 (1941); see Chinese Exclusion Case, 130 581, 623, 32 1068 (1889); Turner 194 279, 719, 48 979 (1904); Fong Yue Ting 149 698, 1016, 37 905 (1893); Harisiades Shaughnessy, 342 580, 72 512, 96 586 (1952). Pursuant power, Congress provided, comprehensive plan immigration '(a)liens paupers professional beggars, vagrants' 'are likely time become charges' excluded admission 1182(a)(8) 1182(a)(15), deported 'has five entry charge affirmatively arisen entry. 1251(a)(8). Admission charges posting bond cash deposit. 1183. seen fit impose burden Rather, broadly declared: 'All every Territory full proceedings security enjoyed white 1981. extend 419 1142. Moreover, clear whatever scope enter Union 'on merely alienage policies constitutionally entrusted Federal Government. 66—67, 403—404, where struck registration (enacted 1939, challenge 727) grounds pre-emption, observed 'where government, superior field, complete scheme states cannot, inconsistently Congress, interfere with, curtail complement, law, enforce auxiliary regulations.' 'can add take imposed admission, naturalization several states. discriminatory burdens derived regulate immigration, accordingly invalid.' declared arising deportation, property. suffer distress, entry, dependency Alien necessarily operate, discourage Indeed, 727 33 considered 'reasonableness' effect he chooses: 'It implies action legitimate conceived bring hostility power. control immigration—to admit exclude aliens—is vested assertion opportunity earning livelihood tantamount abode, ordinary work. And, permissible, practical result acts instead enjoying substantial sense conferred segregated chose offer hospitality.' 42, 11. 35 becoming work, where, 'secure shelter.' condition equate inconsistent policy, abode. impermissible. IV suggests, finally, actually authorized law. Reliance placed Aug. 28, 1950, 351, 556, 1352(b). That section provides: approve fulfills subsection section, imposes, plan— 38 39 '(2) Any excludes States.'11 40 meaning entirely clear. face, authorize, much command, adopt applicable directs state-submitted plans eligibility. Cf. 638—641, 1333—1335. 41 find legislative history 1950 amendments indication congressional intent enacting 1402(b).12 roots identical language aid-to-the-blind sections 1935 enacted. 302(b); 1202(b). House Senate Committee Reports expressly reference that: 'A fact, receives may, wishes, assist insist naturalized time.'13 43 apparent Congress' principal prevent distinguishing native-born American assumed motivated similar 1402(b). discretion, could withhold noncitizens, certain simply expressing understanding law insofar had developed, is, decided. 1402(b), provisions blind, read authorize treatment option demonstrates serious questions presented. Although admittedly determine individual 641, 1335. I, cl. Constitution, 'establish uniform Rule Naturalization.' enactment construed permit legislatures divergent appear contravene explicit uniformity.14 'statutes should whenever possible uphold constitutionality,' Vuitch, 70, 1294, 1298, 601 (1971), requirement. 44 judgments appealed 45 ordered. 46 Affirmed. HARLAN joins Parts opinion, See, example, (1968); (1969); Rosado Wyman, 397, 1207, 442 Wyman James, 381, 408 brought behalf similarly situated who, inability requirement, receive state-administered disabled, aged, '§ 432. Eligibility 'Except hereinafter provided clauses assistance: '(1) Persons whose financial available Other during January 1, 1938 December 31, filed declaration intention represent approximates 65 70 annually. figure stands contrast 585,000 Commonwealth 85,000 Report Assistance, Dec. 1969. Oyama 332 644—646, 269, 274—275, 249 (1948); Korematsu 323 214, 216, 193, 194, (1944); Hirabayashi 320 81, 100, 63 1375, 1385, 87 1774 (1943). McLaughlin Florida, 379 184, 191—192, 283, 287—289, 222 (1964); Loving Virginia, 388 1817, 1822, 1010 (1967); Bolling Sharpe, 347 497, 499, 74 693, 694, 98 884 (1954). McCready 94 391, 248 (1877); Patsone 232 138, 281, 539 (1914). Hauenstein Lynham, 100 628 (1880); Blythe Hinckley, 180 333, 390, 557 (1901). Terrace 263 197, 15, 255 (1923); Porterfield Webb, 225, 21, 278 Webb O'Brien, 313, 112, 318 Frick 326, 115, (1948). E.g., Passenger Cases, How. 492, 702 (1849); Crandall Nevada, Wall. 35, 48—49, 744 (1868); Twining Jersey, 211 97, 19, 53 97 (1908); Edwards 314 160, 178—181, 62 169—170, 119 (Douglas, J., concurring), 183 185, 171—172 (Jackson, concurring) 629, 1328; Oregon Mitchell, 285, 260, 345, 272 (opinion Stewart, J.) rulemaking Act, 1302, Health, Education, regulations, relies: '3720. Requirements Plans titles X, XIV, XVI impose, eligibility, States.' '3730. Interpretation Requirement 'State need contain IV—3720 ensure imposed, regardless how (by birth naturalization) obtained, disqualified receiving XVI. 'Where alternative excluding qualifying eligible, specific years.' HEW Handbook Administration, pt. IV. H.R.Rep.No.1300, 81st Cong., 1st Sess., 53, 153—154; S.Rep.No.1669, 2nd Sess.; H.R.Conf.Rep.No.2771, 118—119. H.R.Rep.No.615, 74th 18; S.Rep.No.628, 29. decide itself enact imposing nationwide

Category: 1