Doors Open for the Poor

In 1941, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a California law that sought to stop poor people at the state border. In 1969, the court voided a one-year California residency requirement for receiving welfare. Thus it was little surprise when the court voted 7 to 2 this week to nullify a 1992 law seeking to set lower welfare benefits for newcomers than state residents.

In a clearly stated majority opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that Americans, rich or poor, may choose where to live. “The states, however, do not have any right to select their citizens,” Stevens said.

Then-Gov. Pete Wilson’s plan, passed at a time of fiscal crisis and never put into effect, would have limited newcomers to welfare payments equivalent to those of their home states for one year if aid there was lower. The idea would have saved California as little as $11 million out of a $3-billion welfare budget, but for individuals the difference could have been harsh. One of the plaintiffs in the 1992 case, a woman from Oklahoma, would have gotten $307 a month for her family of three during the first year here, compared with $641 for a California family of three.

The law ignored California’s higher cost of living and was based on the unproven proposition that California was a “welfare magnet” to the poor in other states. What it sought to do was discriminate not only against nonresidents but against the poor, just as did the so-called anti-Okie law in the 1941 case. The Legislature should remember the court’s rebuke the next time the economy dips and the temptation to save money through unequal treatment is strong.