Digital Commons Network^™

Freedom Of Speech And The ‘Occupy’ Protests: ‘Narrowly Tailored To Further Significant Government Interests’, Mel Cousins

Mel Cousins

This note examines the spate of recent court decisions concerning efforts by Occupy protestors in various cities of the USA to prevent the removal (or restriction) of their protests. In general, though by no means in all cases, the courts, applying existing freedom of speech principles, have upheld the protestors’ right to protest to some extent but have placed narrow limits around the manner in which this right may be exercised. Following a short introduction (Part 1), Part 2 discuses the approach which has been taken by the courts in recent cases. The approach adopted contrasts sharply with the Supreme …

A ‘Simple Test’: Posthumously Conceived Children And Social Security Entitlements In Astrue V Capato, Mel Cousins

Mel Cousins

This case note examines a recent Supreme Court decision concerning the interpretation of the provisions of the Social Security Act concerning entitlement to survivor’s benefits in respect of children. The case involved the correct construction of the term ‘child’ in the Act but arose, more specifically, from a series of cases concerning posthumously conceived children. Courts of Appeal had come to different interpretations as to correct interpretation of the Act and the Supreme Court intervened to resolve the conflict. The Court accepted the Social Security Agency’s (SSA) interpretation of the legislation. However, although legally correct, this does little if anything …

Farm Workers, Equal Treatment And Insurability: Griego V New Mexico Workers’ Compensation Administration, Mel Cousins

Mel Cousins

The US courts have considered a number of cases where a person has argued that his or her exclusion from insurability (either in social security, unemployment insurance or workers compensation) was in breach of the guarantee of equal protection in federal and/or state constitutions. The Social Security Act had originally entirely excluded domestic and agricultural workers. Early cases upholding the constitutionality of the Social Security Act had, inter alia, held that the exclusion of certain classes of worker from the scope of coverage did not render the legislation unconstitutional. However, these cases had not involved claims of racial, economic or …

Access To Quasi-Judicial Decisions – Jama V Minister For Social Protection, Mel Cousins

Mel Cousins

This case involves the important issue of access to the decisions of social welfare appeals officers. The Irish High Court concluded that there was no duty on the Department to maintain a database or open library of decisions to which the public may have access and, therefore, no question of a right of access thereto arose. However, it is submitted that the legal analysis of the general issue is doubtful.

Black Lung Benefits And Constitutional Challenges: The Byrd Amendments To The Black Lung Benefits Act; And The Kentucky Consensus Procedure, Mel Cousins

Mel Cousins

This note discusses two recent issues where legislation concerning benefits for coal workers affected by pneumoconiosis (black lung) was challenged under the US Constitution, including issues of due process, equal treatment and the takings clause. Congress has recently restored earlier legislation making it easier for the survivors of workers affected by black lung to qualify for federal benefits. Several courts of appeal have upheld this legislation against constitutional challenges from employers holding that it is neither in breach of the employers’ due process rights nor a taking within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. In contrast, the …

Equal Protection, Immigrants And Access To Health Care And Welfare Benefits, Mel Cousins

Mel Cousins

Equal Protection, Workers Compensation And Offset Of Benefits (Again) – Caldwell V Maco Workers Compensation And Caputo V Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Commonwealth Of Pennsylvania)

Mel Cousins

As noted in an earlier article, one issue which has received considerable attention in terms of equal protection challenges in US courts is that concerning the offset of one type of social security benefits with worker’s compensation payments. The Supreme Court in Richardson v Belcher upheld the reduction in social security disability insurance because of receipt of a state worker’s compensation payment as rationally based and free from invidious discrimination. The Court and various federal courts of appeals have subsequently shown little interest in subjecting such offset provisions to more than a minimal level of scrutiny. State courts have also …