The Case against the Constitutionality of the Social Security Act

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to set forth briefly and as simply as possible the reasons for believing that at least the major provisions of the Social Security Act are unconstitutional. As a background for the discussion, a brief review of the history of the legislation is necessary. Prior to the depression of I92I, there was in this country no movement of any importance for social insurance. Workmen's compensation laws and factory laws regulating the hours of employment of women and children and the installation of safety devices were familiar, but compulsory unemployment insurance had hardly been heard of and, although there were a few private pension plans in existence, statewide old-age pensions had just begun to be mentioned. But the war had left us with a highly developed industrial system and the problem of old-age dependency an(d the problems created by the shortening of the useful life of the industrial worker had already become felt as a consequence. The short depression of I92I drew attention to these problems and to the related one of unemployment. Various states began to experiment with old-age assistance laws and there was even a feeble movement in favor of compulsory unemployment insurance.' The attention of the public was, however, not drawn to these problems until after the current depression was well under way. By 1932, twenty-one states had adopted old-age assistance laws. They were a modified form of poor relief legislation, giving benefits based upon need. All of these laws followed the same general pattern: they provided for grants to aged indigent persons, the amount of the allowance being determined in each case by the need of the individual beneficiary, but being limited in nearly all cases to $30.00 per