Document: 449 U.S. 166 101 S.Ct. 453 66 L.Ed.2d 368 UNITED STATES RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD, Appellant,v.Gerhard H. FRITZ. No. 79-870. Argued Oct. 6, 1980. Decided Dec. 9, Rehearing Denied Feb. 23, 1981. See 450 960, 1421. Syllabus The Railroad Retirement Act of 1974 (1974 Act) fundamentally restructured the railroad retirement system under predecessor 1937 Act, which had included provisions whereby a person who worked for both and nonrailroad employers qualified social security benefits received systems an accompanying "windfall" benefit. Although providing that employees lacked requisite 10 years employment to qualify as January 1, 1975, changeover date would not receive any windfall benefits, preserved individuals retired were receiving dual date. A provision 45 U.S.C. § 231b(h)(1), also date, but yet retired, if they (1) performed some service in or (2) "current connection" with industry December 31, 1974, their later (3) completed 25 1974. further provided, 231b(h)(2), current connection employment, could obtain lesser amount year (prior 1975) left employment. Appellee others filed class action Federal District Court declaratory judgment 231b(h) is unconstitutional Due Process Clause Fifth Amendment, contending it was irrational Congress distinguish between more than less simply on basis whether retirement. certified plaintiff all persons eligible retire 1977, permanently insured Social Security because before no at end service. court held differentiation based solely employee "active" business "rationally related" congressional purposes insuring solvency protecting vested benefits. Held : challenged do deny equal protection laws guaranteed by Amendment. Pp. 174-179. (a) When economic legislation enacted grounds being violative rational-basis standard appropriate judicial review. If classification has "reasonable basis," does offend Constitution made mathematical nicety practice results inequality. This will invalidate deems unwise unartfully drawn. Cf., e. g., Dandridge v. Williams, 397 471, 90 1153, 491; Jefferson Hackney, 406 535, 92 1724, 32 285. 174-176. (b) Under such principles, violate Because have eliminated classes employees, constitutionally impermissible drawn lines groups purpose phasing out those did achieve its patently arbitrary way, since properly conclude actually acquired statutory entitlement while still employed greater equitable claim members longer when became Furthermore, test means determining are "career railroaders," whom designed. 176-178. (c) Nor there merit Court's conclusion unaware what accomplished misled appeared it. language statute clear, been historically assumed intended enacted. P. 179. Reversed. Edwin S. Kneedler, Washington, D. C., appellant. Daniel Byron, Indianapolis, Ind., appellee. Justice REHNQUIST delivered opinion Court. 1 United States Southern Indiana section 88 Stat. 1305, amended, 231 et seq., Board appealed this pursuant 28 1252. We noted probable jurisdiction. 444 1069, 100 1010, 62 749 (1980). 2 system. Act's statute, adopted 1937, provided disability pursued careers industry. 42 401 benefit.1 legislative history shows payment threatened bankruptcy 1981.2 therefore determined place "sound financial basis" eliminating future accruals benefits.3 various transitional provisions, including grandfather provision, 231b(h),4 expressly employees. 3 In restructuring divided into groups. First, computed new Second, already old continue benefit.5 Third, (and thus benefits), entitled 1974,6 231b(h)(1). Fourth, benefit 231b(h)(2).7 4 Thus, individual who, unretired sufficient full he his But 24 unless And only after leaving reduced prior It these complicated comparisons wrestled 5 Indiana, seeking Amendment irrationally distinguishes annuitants.8 eventually "windfall component" service.9 contended below distinction 6 agreed appellee disagree reverse. 7 initial issue presented case review be applied Constitution. There here taken property violation like contractual may altered even time. Hisquierdo Hisquierdo, 439 572, 575, 99 802, 805, 59 (1979); Flemming Nestor, 363 603, 608-611, 80 1367, 1371-1372, 1435 (1960). distinctions burden fundamental constitutional rights create "suspect" classifications, race national origin, we put cases involving claims one side. San Antonio Independent School Rodriguez, 411 93 1278, 36 16 (1973); Vance Bradley, 440 93, 939, 171 (1979). 8 Despite narrowness issue, earlier altogether consistent pronouncements area. Lindsley Natural Carbonic Gas Co., 220 61, 78-79, 31 337, 340, 55 L.Ed. 369 (1911), said "[w]hen law called question, state facts reasonably can conceived sustain it, existence time must assumed." On other hand, nine F.S. Royster Guano Co. Virginia, 253 412, 415, 40 560, 561, 64 989 (1920), valid Equal Protection Fourteenth "must rest upon ground difference having fair substantial relation object legislation. . ." 9 recent years, however, consistently refused deemed Thus 491 (1970), rejected Maryland welfare violated said: 11 "In area economics welfare, State merely classifications imperfect. 'reasonable basis,' 'is inequality.' 78, 369. 'The problems government practical ones justify, require, rough accommodations-illogical, be, unscientific.' Metropolis Theatre City Chicago, 228 68-70, 33 441, 443, 57 730. 12 ". [The standard] true principle gives federal courts power impose views constitutes wise policy." Id., 485-486, S.Ct., 1161-1162. 13 Of tenor supra, 97, 943, New Orleans Dukes, 427 297, 303, 96 2513, 2516, 49 511 (1976). Earlier, 611, 1373, upheld constitutionality eligibility saying: 14 "[I]t within our authority determine Congressional expressed Section sound equitable, comports well ill Act. answer inquiries come from Congress, courts. Our concern here, often, power, wisdom." 15 dissimilar present one, forced make choice undoubtedly seem inequitable class, "Applying traditional [the Clause], cannot say Texas' decision provide somewhat lower [Aid Families Dependent Children] recipients invidious irrational. Since budgetary constraints allow need recipients, concluded aged infirm least able categorical grant bear hardships inadequate living. While different policy judgments course possible, believe young adaptable sick elderly, especially latter hope improving situation remaining them. Whether agrees determination, nothing forbids it." 549, 1732, 285 (1972). 17 Applying principles case, plain marks beginning inquiry.10 past so. 305, 2517. 18 question achieved way. arbitrary, says appellant, attempt protect relative equities career fully protected, example, expectations Conversely, denied additionally amount, years' regardless 19 former those, appellee, industry, thereafter subsequently appellee's particularly used elsewhere requirement benefits.11 assume passed returned retirement, likely never returned, among pursue U.S., 573, 804. Where, plausible reasons Congress' action, inquiry end. is, course, "constitutionally irrelevant reasoning fact underlay decision," 612, insisted body articulate enacting statute. where legislature necessarily engage process line-drawing. "task classifying inevitably requires almost equally strong favored treatment placed sides line," Mathews Diaz, 426 67, 83-84, 1883, 1893, 48 478 (1976), line might differently points matter legislative, rather judicial, consideration. 20 Finally, literally every member ever voted law, very few survive To sure, lost political battle interest, neither first nor last result occur forum. What enough dispose failed accept argument toto, failure him Amendment.12 21 For foregoing reasons, 22 23 STEVENS, concurring judgment. my BRENNAN's criticism approach merits thoughtful response contained footnote 10, ante, 176-177. BRENNAN correctly analysis reading disputed "conceivable discriminatory repel attack constitute mere tautological recognition do. correct reminding us though example "social legislation," challenge mounted whose legitimate fixed income frustrated by, effect, breach solemn commitment Government. deprives small protected—and, indeed, enhanced1—for similar identical position, I something "conceivable" "plausible" explanation unequal treatment. not, share objective confidently identified "actual purpose" legislature. Actual sometimes unknown. Moreover, undue emphasis actual motivation identically worded statutes invalid neighboring State.2 discover correlation either presume motivated impartial adverse impact disfavored apparent aim legislature, impartiality suspect. If, viewed acceptable cost achieving larger goal, lawmaker rationally decide should incurred. 26 look beyond As often true, product multiple inconsistent led certain compromises. One eliminate described benefit" "earned benefit." That incident broader entire program. Two conflicted broad preserving increasing level payments beneficiaries otherwise changed. emphasizes, originally ultimately sacrificed interest objectives. 27 Given conflicting purposes, decisive questions reduce improve program simultaneously others; whether, deciding reduce, favor annuitants quantum My affirmative. unquestionably legitimate; legitimacy undermined adjustment inflation economy. second hardship—in form long-term expectations—must reduction Arguably, therefore, duty—and surely right decide—to necessary fiscal purpose. Having decision, chose involve degree entitlement. am satisfied currency represents method identifying sort difference. plans frequently retirees ago—and give reward duration—the discrimination supported relevant precedent. follows, judgment, timing employees' term 369, 174, 491, 175, "ground words 989, 174-175. 29 Accordingly, concur 30 BRENNAN, MARSHALL joins, dissenting. Gerhard Fritz statutorily overlap herein benefit," until enactment divested them earned affect entitlements jobs, distinguished day for, retained with, component Amendment1 bars allocating pension manner. turns large part way strictures Morey Doud, 354 457, 472, 77 1344, 1353, 1485 (1957) (Frankfurter, J., dissenting). parties agree legal applicable "rational test. below, see Conclusion Law 7, reprinted App. Juris. Statement 28a. today purports apply standard, actuality fails scrutinize manner established governing precedents. suggest mode virtually immunizes * bears rational relationship Massachusetts Murgia, 307, 312, 2562, 2566, 520 (1976) (per curiam ); curiam). Perhaps clearest statement scrutiny found Johnson Robison, 415 361, 94 1160, 39 389 (1974). considering limitations availability educational Veterans' Readjustment Benefits 1966, eight Members 34 "our proceeds that, although individual's 'does treat ways[;] [it denies] legislate accorded criteria wholly unrelated reasonable, legislation, so similarly circumstanced shall treated alike." ' " 374-375, 1169 (quoting Reed Reed, 404 71, 75-76, 251, 253, 225 turn quoting (1920)) (ellipses brackets original) (emphasis supplied). 35 enactments presumption constitutionality, rests challenging demonstrate "fair ibid., required Lucas, 495, 510, 2755, 2764, 651 Nonetheless, "is toothless one," flimsy implausible justifications classification, proffered Government attorneys. See, Jimenez Weinberger, 417 628, 2496, 41 (1974); U. Dept. Agriculture Moreno, 413 528, 2821, 37 782 Murry, 508, 2832, 767 James Strange, 407 128, 2027, 600 faced test, ask, first, are, and, second, related achievement purposes. II commendably stated House Senate Reports "Principal Purpose Bill." notes generally "[t]he bill provides complete basis,"2 then states: 38 "Persons permitted just existing law." H.R.Rep.No.93-1345, pp. S.Rep.No.93-1163, U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News p. 5702.3 explained considerations fairness retirees: "[A]ny plan include Dual fairly criticized, secured law. why preserved." H.R.Rep.No. 93-1345, 11; S.Rep.No. 93-1163, 5710. "principal explicitly preserve directly conflicts such, purpose; inimical III avoids invalidated deviating three ways analysis. adopts purpose, thereby avoiding necessity evaluating disregards justification suggested Representative Senator, upholds without A. 43 states "the [45 U.S.C.] inquiry." Ante, 176. strange "plain language" tell is; about let alone apparently assumes result. presuming result, reduces tautology. always did. extent analysis, find how irrational, perfectly tailored deduce independent objectives usually statements evidence history, analyze furthers suffice. B 44 analyzes rationality terms attorneys, Congress. 'constitutionally decision.' 179 (1960)). fact, evolved substantially decided. Over recognized post hoc offered primary Weinberger Wiesenfeld, 420 636, 648, n. 16, 95 1225, 1233 514 (1975), "This face value assertions examination scheme demonstrates asserted goal legislation." (Citing cases.) 17, 1288, (1973), pass muster legitimate, articulated added), 314, 2567, sustained State." (Emphasis added.) 381-382, 1172-1173, finding "[t]hese quantitative qualitative distinctions, classification. Califano Goldfarb, 430 199, 212-213, 97 1021, 1029-1030, 51 270 (1977). 46 From clear attorneys thought rational. deferential Legislative Branch: governmental objective, provision. cases, probe deeply. Where piece counter view skepticism. 47 argues discriminate against equity, stating "Congress benefits."4 178. assessment head. shown,5 deprive portion promised H.R.No.93-1345, 4, 120 Cong.Rec. 35613 (1974) (statement Rep. Hudnut); id., 35614 Shuster); 35615 Morgan). unable cite Senator makes imputes justified representatives management labor, self-serving bringing destroys attaching weight statements.6 factual findings concerning development 231b(h), amply revealing point.7 1970, Commission investigate actuarial soundness recommendations reform. Pub.L. 91-377, 84 791. composed representative, labor public representatives. submitted report 1972, recommending, inter alia, earn offset. insisted, "[i]ndividuals virtue status, exercise age equivalent dollar staff tier Retirement, System: Its Coming Crisis, H.R.Doc.No.92-350, 50 After report, asked negotiate submit restructure system, "take account specific Retirement." 93-69, 107, 87 165. Joint Labor-Management Negotiating Committee appointed officials, represent interests active railroaders union members.8 proposed devised system's deficit completely depriving Finding Fact 43, 12a. However, demanded increased members, offset divesting Findings Nos. 39, 40, 44, 11a-12a. found: 52 "Essentially, negotiators traded off added doing basic negotiations. sacrificing unions breached duty representation owed resulted unions' purported class' [Joint Committee] negotiations." 12a-13a. 53 conducted hearings consider Committee's recommendations, directed attention effect situation. testified perpetuated inaccurate impression retain unchanged. Mr. William Dempsey, chairman principal witness hearings, told committee: 54 "[P]rotection [will] people rolls now idea being, this, rely existed working. They contributions. relied protected." Restructuring Hearings H.R. 15301 Interstate Foreign Commerce, 93d Cong., 2d Sess., 214 Accord, 190 Dempsey); 194 204 Dingell); 213-214 242 248 L. Cowen, Chairman Board); 249 Cowen); 335 (statements Messrs. Neil Speirs Wythe Quarles, Jr., 351 Speirs). 56 Most striking following colloquy Dingell Dempsey: "Mr. DINGELL. Who going adversely affected? Somebody get neck this. lucky fellow? 58 DEMPSEY. Well, don't think really. wins. Let me explain. 60 sleight hand happening. applaud understand problem you go realistic pay Now charge system." 201. 61 drafted amendment case.9 misstatement several misstatements witnesses ordinarily lead misapprehended doing. instance, complex outside explain frequent unrebutted, Member correctly, suspect misled. "At during hint understood plaintiff's class." 63, 22a. 63 Therefore, C third deviated genuinely "equitable considerations" classification-in direct contradiction evaluation considerations, private negotiation interested parties, inadequately examined Congress-the suggestion 65 An unadorned "equitable" difficult assess. seems litigant's assertion "equity," inquire equity support demand inquiry, address view, greatest relevance case: contribution system; reasonable expectation reliance; need; (4) character With respect each great co-workers, remain 231b(h). 67 Contribution fewer jobs number vesting Security-usually quarters. During time, contributed systems, met requirements systems. respect, earnings class. contributions reason discrimination. 68 Reasonable reliance. Throughout working lives, assured accordance stood. 70, 25a. No paths calculations assurances. change rules strip decidedly inequitable. 69 "The reliance anticipated receipt adduced herein. 70 71 "Equally detriment. Class alter living due drastic point confirmed negotiations shortly sending April, 1974: 'Mr. [dual benefit] starting all. So theoretically urge 1975. that-we relying responsible stood.' 25a-26a. 72 resolved disturb retirees.10 73 Need. fixed-income elderly people, capable re-entering work force reacquire once lost. average loss $88 per month, element monthly budget. record suppose co-workers. 74 Character many long years. Their duration employment-surely best measure industry-was over twice 60, 21a-22a. Admittedly, appellate involuntarily, lack 72, 26a. encourage workers early, positions younger workers, 573-574, 804-805, (1979), hardly fault done 75 Even notation considered railroad, irrational.11 retiree retention much plainly capricious distinguishing retirees, years: fortuity particular govern lifetime.12 76 Government's considerations," accepted Court, defended. Rather, repeatedly states, conscientious application demands, invalidated. IV empower second-guess wisdom classifications. agreed, powerless beneath ends Otherwise, defer arguments litigators. instant serves unfortunate consequence misplaced deference. willing contrary succeeds effectuating intent. 78 respectfully dissent. new, formula computed, split excess produce $300, additional same creditable compensation double benefit, increase $500. $300 total $600. $100 generally, 2-3 (1974), 5702; stated: "Resolution 'dual benefit' central establishing employees." 11, 5710; 11. interchange agreement entered 1951 caused borne annual drain amounted approximately $450 million year, beneficiaries, solvent." 8, 5709; 7. 1. two-tier measured combined service, alone. tiers security, paid deducted origins 1970 created study 1972 "dual attendant windfalls" cause difficulties. inequitable, favoring spent Report H.R.Doc.No.92-350 recommended establishment type "legally workers" preserved. (i. e., length employment) rights." Following Commission's requested management, Labor Management (hereinafter referred Committee) "tak[ing] account" Commission. outlined proposals letter dated April 18391-18392 eliminated, differed afforded embodying committees lengthy detailed Reports. supra ; supra. 3(h) 1323, pertinent part: "(1) annuity (A) (i) rendered employer, calendar (ii) 2(a)(1) began accrue, (iii) twenty-five (B) ten Society 1975] "(2) conditions set forth subclause (i), (ii), clause subdivision subsection, 1975 [of calculated service]. most "difficult problem" "manner phased basis." note 231. transition Title Code. §§ 204(a)(3) defined 231(o ) mean, general, preceding months. subsection consists through corresponds dates order contains clause, forbid 'so unjustifiable process.' Schneider Rusk, 377 163, 168, 1187, 1190, 218 (1964). perforce Richardson Belcher, 81, 254, 257, (1971). unclear precisely By terms, appear 231b(h)(2) qualifying appears, Fritz, ineligible dissent (1911); (1920); (1957); (1960); (1976); (1975); arrogant scholar uniform principles. realistically speaking, undisturbed joined Lindsley, dissenting opinion. predecessors successors, obliged hesitation asserting, dissent, regulations involved (1972), together proper comments limit that: 1946 occupational survivor annuities, 231a(a) (1)(iv), 231a(d)(1) (ch. 709, 203, 205, 213, 726-735), 1966 supplemental annuity. 231a(b)(1). (Pub.L. 89-699, 1073.) contends draws clearly condition employee's ties 83, recently presumes absent infer antipathy, improvident decisions rectified democratic intervention unwarranted unwisely branch acted." (1979) (footnote omitted). spouses, widows, survivors, early retirees. 231c(g). Compare Rundlett Oliver, 607 F.2d 495 (CA1 1979) (upholding Maine's rape law), Meloon Helgemoe, 564 602 1977), cert. denied, 436 950, 98 2858, 793 (1978) (striking down Hampshire's law). 638, n.2, 1228 (1975). restoring itself, serve case. At discriminated two overall saving money Several pages later, again them: "It takes away employees—those benefits." 6; 7; 5707. Only technical discussions section-by-section analyses reflect consequences 12, 39-40; 38-39. administration 81-82 (supplemental Office Budget). quoted belief contrary, "actually acquir[e] entitlement" 178, nevertheless deprived 231b(h)(2). own reasoning, arbitrarily impermissibly treated. 185-186. discussion following, infra. erroneous, disagreement conclusion. litigation event, record. use draft novel. committee original amending Acts then. 574, 3, 804, Act-Supplemental Benefits, 17285 Subcommittee Commerce Finance 89th (1966); 1362 79th 1st 448 (1945); 147 tendency adequate criticized report: historical formulation abided key financing. Generally major railway carriers bargaining reflecting affects welfare. have, times, screened ratified given Presidential approval." 147. Cf. Nachman Corp. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., 446 359, 374, 1723, (1980) (one passing Employee Income "to prevent 'great personal tragedy' suffered terminated" omitted)). Contrary suggestion, "line-drawing" division along admittedly continuum. Here, isolated utterly nature highlighted exception albeit level, altogether. twist qualification Security. Those benefit; not. Needless say, notice kind after-the-fact shifting justified.

Category: 1