Making Conditions Constitutional by Attaching Them to Welfare: The Dangers of Selective Contextual Ignorance of the Unconstitutional Conditions Doctrine

18 Pages Posted: 23 Jan 2011

See all articles by Julie A. Nice

Julie A. Nice

University of San Francisco - School of Law

Date Written: 1995

Abstract

This article examines the lack of judicial consistency in applying the Unconstitutional Conditions doctrine with regard to the same constitutional guarantee but involving different public benefits. Professor Nice posits that the courts frequently apply a lower level of scrutiny when conditions are attached to welfare benefits than when conditions are attached to other types of government benefits. She specifically examines this inconsistency among decisions involving Free Exercise and Takings. She shows that the Supreme Court has reduced its regular level of heightened scrutiny and instead applied Dandridge-style deference to uphold welfare conditions. For example, in a series of free exercises cases involving unemployment insurance benefits, the Court regularly has applied strict scrutiny and invalidated work requirements that violated the employee’s religious beliefs. In contrast, when the work condition was attached to welfare benefits, the Court splintered and failed to apply strict scrutiny in Bowen v. Roy. Similarly, the Court applied heightened scrutiny and invalidated the taking of a beach access easement as a condition for receiving a building permit, but just the previous day the Court applied only rational basis review and upheld the government’s taking of child support to repay welfare benefits in Bowen v. Gilliard. Professor Nice argues no difference justifies the inconsistent constitutional treatment of conditions attached to welfare and non-welfare benefits.

Keywords: Unconstitutional Conditions Doctrine, Welfare Law, Constitutional Law

Suggested Citation

Nice, Julie A., Making Conditions Constitutional by Attaching Them to Welfare: The Dangers of Selective Contextual Ignorance of the Unconstitutional Conditions Doctrine (1995). Denver University Law Review, Vol. 72, 1995, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1744339

Julie A. Nice (Contact Author)

University of San Francisco - School of Law ( email )

2130 Fulton Street
San Francisco, CA 94117
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
30
Abstract Views
408
PlumX Metrics