Question

brief The Wyman v. James, 400 U.S. 309 (1971) Question What are the Facts of the case, Issue before the court, Describe The role of the Commission in a PA structure, and the Court's Ruling

Answer 1

Facts of the case:

Barbara James and her son Maurice were residents of Bronx, NY in 1971. Following the birth of her son Maurice, James had applied for financial aids with the New York State under the AFDC or Aids to Families with Dependent Children Program. The same was granted to her after a caseworker from the New York State office visited her residence. Two years later she was made aware the another such visit was scheduled to take place of her residence which could have an effect on her eligibility of the financial aid she had been receiving from the New York state the past two years. James refused to let the caseworker carry out the visit of her residence, following which, a procedural hearing took place. James continued to refuse the visit to her residence even during the hearing, which resulted in the termination of her financial aid that was granted under the AFDC. James in turn filed a suit under Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 in United States District Court for the Southern District of New York claiming that a visit of her residence by the caseworker would a violation of her Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The United States District Court ruled in her favour. Although New York appealed.

Issue before the court:

Did the New York State violate James' Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights by terminating the financial aid she was receiving under the AFDC benefits when she refused a visit by the New York appointed caseworker?

The courts ruling:

The court ruled "No" in a 6-3 opinion. The court held that a scheduled visit in the presence of James of her residence was not a "search". Justice Harry A. Blackmun explained that "the visitation in itself is not forced or compelled," which means, "there is no entry of the home and there is no search.". The visit would violate the Fourth Amendment even if the visit "does possess some of the characteristics of a search in the traditional sense," under the unreasonableness standard set forth in Terry v. Ohio. The court concluded that the visit was not unreasonable and the state has all the rights to ensure that the financial aid being granted is being used to the benefit go the child. Justice Byron R. White concurred in the judgment.