Recent examples of abuses in the federal legal services program includes
an ongoing California suit attacking local efforts to control soaring welfare
costs and a challenge to a New York law that promotes parental responsibility.
New York Legal Services Claims Unwed Mothers Can Not Be Made to ID Fathers
In a 1997 lawsuit, Southern Tier Legal Services argued that it was illegal to seek the cooperation of unwed mothers in identifying the fathers and making them reimburse the government for their children’s Medicaid expenses. As a condition of receiving Medicaid for prenatal and postpartum care, the New York Department of Social Services requires that unwed mothers assist the state in establishing the paternity of their children for the purpose of making fathers pay for their children’s medical bills. The case started fours years ago when DSS ordered Thomas English to pay $4656 to cover the Medicaid expenses related to the birth of his son by Jodi Perry, the boy’s unwed mother. Southern Tier Legal Services immediately filed a lawsuit challenging the legality of the policy. Legal services lawyers argued that “there can be no greater invasion of privacy than the requirement that the state force an individual to legally declare the father of her child.” A federal district judge rejected the argument, ruling that the right to privacy does not shield authorities from making fathers satisfy their legal obligations to their children.
See Perry v. Dowling, 963 F. Supp. 231, US Dist. Ct., 1997
Legal Services Says Counties Should Raise Taxes to Fund Welfare
Legal Services of Northern California is currently suing Sacramento
County for reducing welfare benefits for able-bodied individuals. The county
got permission from the state in 1995 to cut its General Assistance benefit
program by $7.5 million as part of an effort to close a $40 million budget
deficit. General Assistance is a state program, administered by counties,
that provides assistance to individuals who are ineligible for federal
welfare aid. The cuts led to a reduction in benefits from $286 to
$221 per month. In addition to meeting its budget shortfall, county officials
argued that they needed to cut General Assistance in order to fund $157
million in other critical services, especially law enforcement. However,
LSNC immediately filed a lawsuit claiming that the state should require
the county to raise taxes rather than cut benefits.
See Goff v. County of Sacramento, 59 Cal. App. 4th 586, 1997
Legal Services Lawyers Call Local Attempts to Improve Education Unconstitutional
In 1997, Legal Services of North Carolina argued in a lawsuit that the
state shouldn’t allow school districts to spend extra money on education
because students in poorer districts would be deprived of an equal education.
In addition to guaranteeing children the right to an education through
state-funded public schools, the North Carolina Constitution also allows
local districts to supplement state funding with their own money to further
educational excellence. Legal services, however, argued that the state
was violating the constitutional right to equal educational opportunity
because poorer districts couldn’t spend as much money. The State Supreme
Court rejected the argument as harmful to a quality education. The court
ruled that, “If strong local public support in a given district improved
the educational opportunities of that district to the point that they were
substantially better than those of any other district, the children of
all the other school districts by definition would be denied substantially
equal educational opportunities. The result would be a steady stream of
litigation which would constantly interfere with the running of the schools.”
See Leandro v. State of North Carolina, 346 N.C. 336; 488 S.E.2d
249; N.C. Supreme Ct., 1997