Townsend v. Swank Alexander

Townsend v. Swank Alexander
Syllabus
943496Townsend v. Swank Alexander — Syllabus
Court Documents
Concurring Opinion
Burger

United States Supreme Court

404 U.S. 282

Townsend et al.  v.  Swank, Director, Department of Public Aid of Illinois, et al.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

No. 70-5021  Argued: November 8, 1971 --- Decided: December 20, 1971[1]

This class action challenges on equal protection and supremacy grounds an Illinois statute and regulation under which needy dependent children 18 through 20 years old attending high school or vocational training school qualify for benefits under the federally assisted Aid to Families With Dependent Children (AFDC) program, but such children attending a college or university do not qualify. A three-judge District Court upheld the Illinois scheme.

Held: Under § 402 (a)(10) of the Social Security Act, a state participating plan under the AFDC program must provide that aid to families with dependent children shall be furnished with reasonable promptness to "all eligible" individuals. Since § 406 (a)(2)(B) of the Act makes dependent 18-20-year-olds eligible for benefits whether attending a college or university or a vocational or technical training course, and Congress has authorized no limitation of eligibility standards within the age group, the Illinois program conflicts with that federal statutory provision and violates the Supremacy Clause. Pp. 285-292.

314 F. Supp. 1082, reversed.


BRENNAN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which DOUGLAS, STEWART, WHITE, MARSHALL, and BLACKMUN, JJ., joined. BURGER, C.J., filed an opinion concurring in the result, post, p. 292.


Michael F. Lefkow argued the cause and filed briefs for appellants in No. 70-5021. M. James Spitzer, Jr., argued the cause pro hac vice for appellants in No. 70-5032. With him on the briefs was Melvin B. Goldberg.

Donald J. Veverka, Assistant Attorney General of Illinois, argued the cause for appellees in both cases. With him on the brief were William J. Scott, Attorney General, and Francis T. Crowe, Bernard Genis, and David E. Bradshaw, Assistant Attorneys General.

Solicitor General Griswold and Richard B. Stone filed a brief for the United States as amicus curiae urging affirmance in both cases.

Notes edit

  1. Together with No. 70-5032, Alexander et al. v. Swank, Director, Department of Public Aid of Illinois, et al., also on appeal from the same court.

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).

Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse