Legal Document

496 U.S. 478 110 S.Ct. 2499 L.Ed.2d 438 Louis W. SULLIVAN, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Petitionerv.Elizabeth STROOP, et al. No. 89-535. Argued March 26, 1990. Decided June 14, Syllabus In determining whether a family's income disqualifies it from receiving benefits under the Aid to Families With Dependent Children (AFDC) program Part A Title IV Social Security Act, appropriate agency participating State is required "disregard first $50 any child support payments" received by family in month for which are sought. 42 U.S.C. § 602(a)(8)(A)(vi). Under this provision, petitioner Services has declined "disregard" "child's insurance benefits" II reasoning that such not "child support" because term, as used throughout IV, invariably refers payments absent parents. The District Court granted summary judgment respondents, custodial parents AFDC benefits, their suit challenging Secretary's interpretation Appeals affirmed, that, since applicants burdened same eligibility constraints those directly parents, no rational basis exists according one class families mitigating benefit disregard while depriving other benefit. court added construe 602(a)(8)(A)(vi) exclude would raise constitutional equal protection concerns. Held: do constitute within meaning clear unambiguous language statute demonstrates Congress term art referring exclusively See, e.g., 651, provision D devoted "Child Support Enforcement Paternity." Since also makes plain meant work tandem with provide uniform levels children need, see §§ 602(a)(26), 602(a)(27), 654(5), phrase two Parts must be given meaning. Sorenson v. Treasury, 475 851, 860, 106 1600, 1606-1607, 89 855. Thus, although governmentally funded child's might characterized "support" generic sense, they sort envisioned IV. This statutory distinction does violate Equal Protection Clause "if state facts reasonably may conceived justify it," Bowen Gilliard, 483 587, 601, 107 3008, 3017, 97 485, justified Congress' intent encourage making Pp. 481-485. 870 F.2d 969 (CA 4 1989) reversed. REHNQUIST, C.J., delivered opinion Court, WHITE, O'CONNOR, SCALIA, KENNEDY, JJ., joined. BLACKMUN, J., filed dissenting opinion, BRENNAN MARSHALL, joined, post, p. 485. STEVENS, 496. Clifford M. Sloan, Washington, D.C., petitioner. Jamie B. Aliperti, respondents. Chief Justice REHNQUIST Court. 1 case we review determination petitioner, paid pursuant 49 Stat. 623, amended, 402(d) (1982 ed. Supp. V), Act governing (AFDC). See U.S.C ed., V). We uphold reverse contrary holding United States Fourth Circuit. 2 requires applicable agencies consider "other resources or relative claiming" "in need" benefits. 602(a)(7)(A). "shall determine ineligible aid combined value whose . exceeds" level specified Act. 602(a)(7)(B). Central amendments Deficit Reduction 1984 (DEFRA), Pub.L. 98-369, 2640, 98 494, 1145-1146, affecting amendment provides: 3 ". [W]ith respect month, [§ 602(a)(7) ], agency— 5 dependent applying (including collected section 657(b) title). ." V) (emphasis added). 6 on behalf who members view, Government-funded purposes "invariably parents." Brief Petitioner 13. 7 Respondents aggrieved implementation DEFRA amendments. They sued Eastern Virginia petitioner's andconstitu tional grounds. Complaint, App. 31-33. respondents challenge thereby avoided reaching challenge. Pet. Cert. 22a. 8 Circuit affirmed Stroop Bowen, 969, 975 (1989). According Appeals, nowhere explicated its use only known discussion purpose our decision 485 (1987). As read noted "the father serves mitigate burden changes wrought amendments." F.2d, at 974 (citing U.S., 594, S.Ct., 3013-3014). reasoned had considered question disregarding payments, "received lieu made father," serve harshness 974. less than noncustodial another indistinguishable thus rejected Id., 975. certiorari, 493 1018, 715, 735 (1990), resolve conflict between Eighth Todd Norman, 840 608 (1988). 9 think construction amply supported text shows being case, need go further: 10 " 'If "that end matter, court, well agency, give effect unambiguously expressed Congress." ascertaining statute, look particular issue, design whole.' K mart Corp. Cartier, Inc., 486 281, 291-292, 108 1811, 1818, 100 313 (1988) (internal citations omitted). 11 an initial common usage legally compulsory Black's Law Dictionary 217 (5th 1979) defines 12 "[t]he legal obligation contribute economic maintenance, including education, children; enforceable both civil criminal contexts. dissolution custody action, money parent toward expenses marriage." 13 Attorneys have practiced area domestic relations law will immediately recognize definition. insist, however, traditionally "turned authorities general reference, dictionaries, [give] 'ordinary ordinary words.' 20 Sullivan Everhart, 494 83, 91-92, 960, 965-966, 72 (1990)). But reference upon principally rely "money care one's minor child, esp[ecially] divorced spouse guardian decree divorce." Random House English Language 358 (2d ed.1987) added) (cited 20). seek bolster view definitions word dictionaries. Ibid. where appears become art, attempt break down into constituent words apt illuminate 14 depart usage. previously noted, provisions issue here, contained 601-679 heading discloses, establishes unified grants "For Needy For Child-Welfare Services" implemented through cooperative efforts Federal Government. Establishment 651-667. authorizes appropriations 15 "[f]or enforcing obligations owed (or former spouse) whom living, [and] locating 651 16 remainder D, 652-667 abounds references context funds 652(a)(1), 652(a)(7), 652(a)(10)(B), 652(a)(10)(C), 652(b), 653(c)(1), 654, 654(6), 654(19)(A), 654(19)(B), 656(b), 657(a), 659(a), 659(b), 659(d), 661(b)(3), 662(b). Section 653, indeed, creates "Locator Service." 17 Child constitutes 601-615. 602(a)(27) plans participation "provide plan approved part operates substantial compliance plan." 602(a)(26) 18 condition [AFDC benefits], each applicant recipient required— 19 "(A) assign rights person (i) his own member aid, "(B) cooperate (ii) obtaining claimed. 21 turn, implementing programs 22 (A) individual assignment [in A] title effective, shall distribution 657 D] title. 654(5). 23 These cross-references illustrate operate together closely need. That leads further conclusion 602(a)(8)(A)(vi), generally, limited sense repeated D. relation presents classic application "normal rule ' "identical different parts act intended meaning." 1606, 855 (1986) (quoting Helvering Stockholms Enskilda Bank, 293 84, 87, 55 50, 51, 79 L.Ed. 211 (1934) (in turn quoting Atlantic Cleaners & Dyers, Inc. States, 286 427, 433, 52 607, 608-609, 76 1204 (1932))). 24 incorporates definition find face inquiry end. disregard, accordingly, admit advanced accepted courts below. Though scheme. explicitly "insurance" out public treasury all meeting criteria. Thus portion disregarded 25 construed way did felt adopt serious doubt constitutionality. 12a. share doubt. agree desire see, 602(a)(26)(B)(ii) 654(5) (requiring recipients assist collection D)), affords but it." 26 therefore 27 Reversed. 28 MARSHALL join, dissenting. 29 Today holds terms "any compels apply disabled, retired, deceased express supporting child. Because I am persuaded crabbed neither compelled nor consistent purpose, arbitrarily deprives certain modest urgently needed welfare benefit, dissent. 30 * begin, majority, provision. It title)."1 majority's narrow interpretation. "any" generally means forms types thing mentioned. When coupled parenthetical "including .," indicates "support paid" type larger universe payments." majority recognizes, 602(a)(26)(A) "assign person. almost always fall clause State. indicate various payments; limiting parent's renders meaningless. 31 insistence excludes little sense. mandatory wage deductions, designed ensure worker's dependents some income, should worker retire, die, disabled. Califano Boles, 443 282, 283, 99 2767, 2769, 61 541 (1979) (Title "attempts obviate, forced savings, dislocations otherwise accompany old age, disability, death breadwinner"). set aside wages order earn event he becomes unable so himself. entitled if she lived with, financial from, insured worker—that is, relationship did) rise obligation. sole children's children. Jimenez Weinberger, 417 628, 634, 94 2496, 2500, 41 363 (1974) ("The primary scheme disabled earner"); Mathews Lucas, 427 495, 507, 96 2755, 2763, (1976) explains [or disabled] insureds can demonstrate 'need' dependency"); De Castro, 429 181, 185-186, n. 6, 431, 434-435, 50 389 (1976). unlawful purpose. 408(e) ed.).2 How court-ordered parent? Their source same: assets.3 needs working living home. even explain why understanding include says covers—legally voluntary payments,4 spousal payments5 payments. 32 Nonetheless, insists support." points refer begs question. Naturally, was concerned "enforcing children." Other support, voluntarily Government dead, retired involve problems enforcement.6 Nowhere actually define support," thought referred parent. 33 relies maxim identical related statutes, Ante, 484. Like maxims, merely assumption, valid applicable. Erlenbaugh 409 239, 93 477, 34 446 (1972), example, follow maxim, invoked simply ambiguities doubts language, but, "to introduce exception coverage [statute] none now apparent." 245, 481. commented: "This sensible statutes were function, plainly not." went purposes, reason scope other. 245-247, 481-482. Columbia Carter, 418, 421, 602, 604, 613 (1973) ("At glance, seem logical assume effect. Nevertheless vary meet law") quotation marks omitted); ("[S]ince most shades meaning, susceptible expanded abridged conform used, presumption readily yields [when] words, though act, found dissimilar connections"). Court's articulation limits (1932), bears repeating, remains true today: "But rigid whenever there variation connection warrant employed intent. [T]he law, arrived consideration expressed, circumstances employed. 35 "It unusual meanings precludes giving legislature instance." 609. 36 conclude unequivocally equally opposite broad, inclusive proper history construing 37 conservatively restrictive approach, passing hardship brought about closer these necessary understand function changed ways relevant here. First, established "mandatory filing unit" requirement take account family, household. 602(a)(38) 589, 3011, 38 prior could choose applications sources. exclusion, circumstances, advantageous family; then receive excluded overall eligibility. situations separate greater incremental amount better off counting application. 39 Along new requirement, enacted Gilliard explained: 40 "Because unit received, practical many families' total reduced. change mitigated somewhat providing remitted counted level." 3013.7 legislative supports harsh effects filing-unit proposed 1982, dropped Conference opposition House. H.R.Conf.Rep. 97-760, (1982). 1983, again Senate. S.Rep. 98-300, 165 (1983). Again, House, carried over next session. Committee Ways Means, Description Administration's Fiscal Year 1985 Budget, Comm. Print 98-24, pp. 25, 29-30 (1984). 1984, Senate H.R. 4170, bill became (DEFRA). report House-Senate explains: "The conference agreement follows following modification: monthly established." 98-861, 1407 Neither Conference, plausible explanation sudden appearance assuage concerns Members impact facilitate passage requirement. 43 falls applies categories families. Appeals' ambiguity 44 history, deference NLRB Food Commercial Workers, 484 112, 123, 413, (1987) ("On pure construction, job try congressional intent, using 'traditional tools construction.' If so, effect, regulations fully it"); Chevron U.S.A. Natural Resources Defense Council, 467 837, 843, 9, 104 2778, 2781, 81 694 (1984) judiciary final authority issues reject administrative constructions employing traditional ascertains intention precise effect"). III 45 Even ambiguous, still arbitrary reflect "permissible statute." 2782. position nn. 5, supra. 46 Consider, consisting mother three One marriage receives her father. sets every sends them support. applies. 4, Then retires stops contributions, month. Secretary, apply. obtains obligating make so. asks amend order, satisfy 2, 47 Throughout remain same. forcing count reducing income—her father's earnings—and income—to fulfill duty child—remain applicability vagaries regulations. 48 argues incentive enforcement (since reimburse AFDC). indication limit incentive. There mention provision; moreover, anywhere amendments.8 incentive, Not depend parent; deducted wages—just like deductions. 3, Also, insofar help collect To qualify parent, complete and, necessary, establish paternity. reduce eligibility, them. believe cannot assuming ambiguous considered, good conscience defer results irrational reduction needy regret acquiescence effort cut costs available. 51 53 Although answer presented quite me argument. puts terminology considers usage, surviving earner form obviously Moreover, respondents' effectuates intent: when determined, more likely aid. Finally, achieves parity provision's purpose—fairly inferred history—of hardships imposed available income. 54 fairly encompassed sharply focus specific problem case; suggests much. Yet, fact sufficient refusing albeit imperfectly, chose. reasons, others stated BLACKMUN thorough affirm Appeals. provides collects (AFDC), pay month's payment retain rest overwhelming passed concluded fulfilled recognizing functional equivalence 974-975 (CA4 (collecting cases); 608, 614, (CA8 1988) (dissenting opinion). ultimate earnings. (1979). wage-assignment automatically (just deductions are). 666(b) Fed.Reg. 21644 id., 21642. reliance "abounds 'child support' parents," ante, 483, inconsistent small sum, Virginia, residence, maximum currently $265. 1-2. CFR 233.20(a)(2) (1989); Code 63.1-110 (Supp.1990). An additional 19% increase 1975 allowed 40% level. 657(a)(1) ed.). terms, "during months beginning July 1, 1975." 1975, just been established, apparently believed temporary requirements. Such rule, never 1984. By cooperation requirements long-standing conditions Custodial failed know stood lose very contexts 1974 usual reluctance infer views another. Russello 464 16, 296, 302, 78 (1983); Oscar Mayer Co. Evans, 441 750, 758, 2066, 2072-2073, 60 609

Classification Label: 1