GAINES' RIGHTS AGAINST THE CARMI WELFARE DEPARTMENT
This legal memorandum details and analyzes the steps which Jimmy Gaines ("Gaines") may take against the Carmi, Illinois welfare department in connection with the threatened termination of his benefits under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program and to prepare for the forthcoming hearing. It also discusses the public policy issues involved.
Under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution which is applicable to the states and localities under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, no State "shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law."
Was Gaines given adequate notice of the pending hearing? The United States Supreme Court has ruled that in cases involving the threatened termination of the predecessor dependency benefit assistance program (Aid to Families with Dependent Children or AFDC), the beneficiary has the right to present his case at a duly noticed hearing and to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses. Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970). In the present case, Baines has been told by Martha Endicott ("Endicott"), the local welfare office manager, that he can appear without counsel at a hearing the following morning. This would appear to fall short of reasonable notice. In Goldberg, the Court upheld the constitutionality of a statutory seven day notice provision, but it indicated that "there may be cases where fairness would require that a larger time be given." One day is not sufficient time for Gaines and his counsel to research and prepare to argue the constitutional and legal issues involved or to prepare to question Endicott and her supervisor on the critical factual issues discussed below, -- i.e. whether Baines has 'cohabited' with Ms. Bayley (as opposed to engaging occasionally in sexual relations with her) and whether Ms. Bayley can realistically be characterized as a...