Court Opinion

ID: 9497785
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 17:00:12.178945+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:58:25.328918
License: Public Domain

HEANEY, Circuit Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. It is difficult to understand why this case was not resolved before it reached our court. The Social Security Administration (SSA) determined that Taylor has been continually disabled since October 2, 1997. She suffers from multiple sclerosis, which is recognized by the SSA as a severe impairment. As a result of this impairment, she sometimes has difficulty walking, lifting or handling objects, and experiences pain, dizziness, loss of coordination and impaired memory. Taylor is unable to work or support her children because of her impairment. Before the onset of her disability, Taylor worked and paid into social security for eight years, thus qualifying her for benefits. Having found that Taylor is entitled to benefits, the SSA contends that it may not pay benefits to any person who cannot demonstrate that she is lawfully present in the United States. 42 U.S.C. § 402(y). The SSA has not suggested that Taylor has committed any crime, entered the country illegally, or is not lawfully present in the United States. The SSA even concedes that if Taylor *899were currently residing outside of the United States, her benefits could be paid pursuant to an agreement between the United States and the United Kingdom.
Taylor was adopted by United States citizen parents when she was ten years old and lawfully admitted to the country in 1984. Taylor married a United States citizen, and is the mother of two United States citizen children. She has resided in the United States continually since 1984, and has worked and reported earnings from 1990 to 1997, the onset of her disability. Despite her myriad connections to the country, the SSA states that Taylor has not produced documents showing her lawful presence.6
The majority has laid out a path for Taylor to follow. As it notes, Taylor may be lawfully present. She has produced documents showing that she was lawfully admitted to the country, and the record reveals no clear violation of the terms of her status. It is possible that Taylor could easily procure the necessary original documents.
After a careful review of the record and the regulations cited by the parties during the course of this litigation, I am convinced that Taylor must obtain proper documentation 7 from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). POMS RS 00204.025(B)(1). This court cannot determine whether Taylor should receive such documents, but in all candor, I see no reason why they should not be promptly issued.8 Careful consideration should be given to the effective date because Taylor’s benefits will be limited to those due after the date the document is issued. In light of Taylor’s many connections to the United States, the DHS must have a very strong reason for not making her lawful presence retroactive to at least October 2, 1997. I part from the majority in that I would provide Taylor with an opportunity to obtain the requested writ of mandamus if she presents this documentation to the district court. Because the only impediment to Taylor’s receiving benefits is her inability to establish her lawful presence in the United States, I would hold that she is entitled to benefits, and to the writ, if she produces appropriate documentation. If Social Security continues to refuse to make the required disability benefit payments to Taylor, the district court should issue the writ of mandamus requiring the SSA to pay the disability benefits. I would therefore remand this matter to the district court with direction to issue the writ of mandamus if Taylor obtains appropriate documentation verifying her lawful presence within a reasonable period of time.

. It is not clear why Taylor’s counsel has been unable to assist her in obtaining these documents, clarifying her immigration status, or referring her to someone better able to do so.

. One form of proper documentation would be a current Form 1-551 Permanent Resident Card, commonly known as a green card.

. Taylor’s current disability may present an obstacle to obtaining current documents because she is not currently employed. This creates a "Catch-22” for Taylor if she cannot get documents because she is now disabled, and she is unable to get her social security benefits because she cannot get immigration documents. In my view, Taylor should not be caught in this catch.