i need help with american history?

scenario 2-

Thompson and her children had been denied state public assistance (welfare) following her move to Connecticut because of a one-year residency requirement. She brought suit against Shapiro, the Welfare Commissioner, in District court. Thompson claimed that the residency requirement impeded her "right to travel," a precedent which was established in the Supreme Court case U.S. v. Guest. She also claimed that this residency requirement was a violation of her rights under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

i need help with this-

Legal question: This is the question the judge must ask himself or herself to determine if the right has been violated; for example, has the State of Florida violated the defendants' 14th Amendment guarantee to equal protection under the law?

The decision: this is the answer to the legal question described above.

The rationale: This is a minimum of one-paragraph explanation of the decision. In the rationale, you must cite specific facts which support your decision, including reference to how the 14th Amendment applies.

3 Answers

  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    You have the right to travel but states maintain their sovereignty from one another as part of the United States of America, not the states of united America. Therefore states retain the right of funding state run programs aimed at their own populace. I would move to Alaska and get my check every year if it wasn't so.

    Source(s): Artist/historian
    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    The Law is the Law, it is assumed that ignorance of the law is no excuse. Her situation sounds Grimm at best. She may need to contact a Church or local food bank for assistance. This Parent, unless she is physically unable, needs to get a job as soon as she can. Only then, can she try for a special circumstances waiver. Our Child support laws are so out of touch with reality right now that it seems the wrong Parent is being punished for trying to do what is right. I wish her luck. The ultimate answer is that she goes to work and finds affordable child care. Too many people are depending on taxpayers for handouts.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I say no. A state cannot make a law that abridges a constitutional right. There is no constitutional right to receive public assistance. She claims that she is being denied based on her residency and that is a denial of equal protection because the laws are applied differently to people who haven't been residents as long as her. But since no constitutional right is being abridged, that argument doesn't fly.

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.