The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

A state statute denied welfare benefits to Thompson (Ps). Each of the Ps, had accrued rights under their previous addresses but when they moved they lost those benefits because they did not meet residency requirements. The District of Columbia maintains that the waiting period is valid based on four factors; the waiting period: 1) preserves the integrity of state public assistance programs by deterring individuals from seeking benefits and remaining a continuing burden to state; 2) prevents illegal state entrants from obtaining multiple benefits; 3) ensures that only individuals who made contributions to the state by paying taxes and promoting community development receive benefits; and 4) assists the state in efficiently carrying out its administrative objectives as well as encourage others to move to the state. The District Court determined that because the state benefit program stemmed from the federal Aid to Families and Dependent Children (AFDC) program does not automatically make it constitutionally valid. The District Court held that the statute was unconstitutional. Also, Pennsylvania and Connecticut had similar laws which denied welfare assistance to residents who had not lived within their jurisdiction for at least one year immediately prior to the applications. The Supreme Court consolidated the cases and granted certiorari.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.