View source for Social Security Act

{{Use mdy dates|date=November 2015}}

{{Infobox U.S. legislation
| shorttitle        = Social Security Act of 1935
| othershorttitles  = SSA
| longtitle         = The Social Security Act of 1935
| colloquialacronym =
| nickname          = SSA
| enacted by        = 74th
| effective date    =
| public law url    =
| cite public law   =
| cite statutes at large = {{USStatute|74|271|49|620|1935|08|14}}
| acts amended    =
| acts repealed   =
| title amended   = <!--US code titles changed-->
| sections created = {{usctc|42|7}}
| sections amended =
| leghisturl      =
| introducedin    = House
| introducedbill  = {{USBill|74|H.R.|7260}}
| introducedby    =
| introduceddate  =
| committees      =
| passedbody1     = House
| passeddate1     = April 19, 1935
| passedvote1     = [https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/74-1/h39 372-33]
| passedbody2     =
| passedas2       = <!-- used if the second body changes the name of the legislation -->
| passeddate2     =
| passedvote2     =
| conferencedate  =
| passedbody3     =
| passeddate3     =
| passedvote3     =
| agreedbody3     = <!-- used when the other body agrees without going into committee -->
| agreeddate3     = <!-- used when the other body agrees without going into committee -->
| agreedvote3     = <!-- used when the other body agrees without going into committee -->
| agreedbody4     = <!-- used if agreedbody3 further amends legislation -->
| agreeddate4     = <!-- used if agreedbody3 further amends legislation -->
| agreedvote4     = <!-- used if agreedbody3 further amends legislation -->
| passedbody4     =
| passeddate4     =
| passedvote4     =
| signedpresident = [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]]
| signeddate      = August 14, 1935
| amendments      = [[Social Security Amendments of 1965]]<br />[[Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Balanced Budget Refinement Act of 1999]]
| SCOTUS cases    = ''[[Steward Machine Company v. Davis]]'', ''[[Helvering v. Davis]]''
}}
[[File:Signing Of The Social Security Act.jpg|thumb|President [[Franklin D. Roosevelt|Roosevelt]] signs the Social Security Act into law on August 14, 1935.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ssa.gov/history/1930.html |title=History 1930 |publisher= [[Social Security Administration]] |date= |accessdate= May 21, 2009}}</ref>]]
{{main article|Social Security (United States)}}

The '''Social Security Act of 1935''' {{USStatute|74|271|49|620}}, now codified as {{usctc|42|7}}, created [[Social Security (United States)|Social Security]] in the United States, and is relevant for [[US labor law]]. It created a basic right to a pension in old age, and insurance against unemployment.

==Background==
In the [[Second New Deal]], the Social Security Act was signed into law by [[Franklin D. Roosevelt|President Franklin D. Roosevelt]] on August 14, 1935. The act laid the groundwork for the modern welfare system in the United States, with its primary focus to provide aid for the elderly, the unemployed, and children. Industrialization and the urbanization in the 19th Century created many new social problems, and transformed ideas of how society and the government should function together because of them. As industry expanded, cities grew quickly to keep up with demand for labor. Tenement houses were built quickly and poorly, cramming new migrants from farms and Southern and Eastern European immigrants into tight and unhealthy spaces. Work spaces were even more unsafe.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Butler|first1=Chris|title= "The Social Impact of Industrialization," The Flow of History|url=http://www.flowofhistory.com/units/eme/17/fc113.|website=Flow of History|accessdate=24 October 2016}}</ref> In 1890, [[Jacob Riis]] wrote that “the quick change of economic conditions in the city…often out paces all plans of relief.”{{citation needed|date=January 2017}}

==Contents==
The Social Security Act has been amended significantly over time, but contains ten major titles. 

===Title I, old age===
Title I is designed to give money to states to provide assistance to aged individuals 

===Title III, unemployment===
Title III concerns unemployment insurance

===Title IV, child aid===
Title IV concerns [[Aid to Families with Dependent Children]].

===Title V, child welfare===
Title V concerns Maternal and Child Welfare.

===Title VI, public health===
Title VI concerns public health services.

===Title X, blindness===
Title X concerns support for blind people.<ref name=Achene>Achene, Andrew (1986). Social Security Visions and Revisions. New York: [[Cambridge University Press]]. p. 25-6.</ref>

{{expand section|date=September 2016}}

==Constitutional litigation==
In the 1930s, the [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]] struck down many pieces of Roosevelt's New Deal legislation, including the [[Railroad Retirement Board|Railroad Retirement Act]]. The Court threw out a centerpiece of the New Deal, the [[National Industrial Recovery Act]], the [[Agricultural Adjustment Act]], and New York State's [[minimum-wage]] law. President Roosevelt responded with an attempt to pack the court via the [[Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937]]. On February 5, 1937, he sent a special message to Congress proposing legislation granting the President new powers to add additional judges to all federal courts whenever there were sitting judges age 70 or older who refused to retire.<ref name="Supremecourthistory.org">[http://www.supremecourthistory.org/01_society/01.html Supremecourthistory.org] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081006175022/http://www.supremecourthistory.org/01_society/01.html |date=October 6, 2008 }}</ref> The practical effect of this proposal was that the President would get to appoint six new Justices to the Supreme Court (and 44 judges to lower federal courts), thus instantly tipping the political balance on the Court dramatically in his favor. The debate on this proposal lasted over six months. Beginning with a set of decisions in March, April, and May 1937 (including the Social Security Act cases), the Court would sustain a series of New Deal legislation<ref name="Social Security Administration">{{cite web|url=http://www.ssa.gov/history/court.html|title=Social Security Administration|publisher=Ssa.gov|accessdate=2011-09-11}}</ref> Chief Justice [[Charles Evans Hughes]] played a leading role in defeating the court-packing by rushing these pieces of New Deal legislation through and ensuring that the court's majority would uphold it.<ref name="historycooperative.org">[http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/lhr/24.1/henretta.html#REF38 www.historycooperative.org [11&#93;]. Historycooperative.org. Retrieved on 2013-08-12.</ref>

In March 1937, [[Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States|Associate Justice]] [[Owen Roberts]], who had previously sided with the court's [[Four Horsemen (Supreme Court)|four conservative justices]], shocked the American public by siding with Hughes and the court's [[Three Musketeers (Supreme Court)|three liberal justices]] in striking down the court's previous decision in the 1923 case ''[[Adkins v. Children's Hospital]]'', which held that minimum wage laws were a violation of the Fifth Amendment's [[due process clause]] and were thus unconstitutional, and upheld the constitutionality of Washington state's minimum wage law in ''[[West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish]].'' In 1936, Roberts joined the four conservative justices in using the ''Adkins'' decision to strike down a similar minimum wage law New York state enforced in ''Morehead v. New York ex rel. Tipaldo''<ref name="ussc|298|587|1936">{{ussc|298|587|1936}}</ref> and his decision to reverse his previous vote in the ''Morehead'' decision would be known as [[the switch in time that saved nine]]. In spite of widespread speculation that Roberts only agreed to join the court's majority in upholding New Deal legislation, such as the Social Security Act, during the spring of 1937 because of the court packing plan, Hughes wrote in his autobiographical notes that Roosevelt's court reform proposal "had not the slightest effect on our [the court's] decision" in the ''Parrish'' case<ref name="McKenna">{{cite book |last=McKenna |first=Marian C. |title=Franklin Roosevelt and the Great Constitutional War: The Court-packing Crisis of 1937. |publisher=Fordham University Press |location=New York, NY |year=2002 |isbn=978-0-8232-2154-7}}</ref>{{rp|419}} and that the delayed announcement of the decision created the false impression that the Court had retreated under fire.<ref name="McKenna"/>{{rp|419}} Following the vast support that was demonstrated for the New Deal through Roosevelt's [[United States presidential election, 1936|re-election in 1936]],<ref name="McKenna"/>{{rp|422–23}} Hughes persuaded Roberts to no longer base his decisions on political maneuvering and side with him in future cases that involved New Deal legislation<ref name="McKenna"/>{{rp|422–23}}

Records show Roberts had indicated his desire to overturn the ''Adkins'' decision two days after oral arguments concluded for the ''Parrish'' case on December 19, 1936.<ref name="McKenna"/>{{rp|413}} During this time, however, the court was divided 4-4 following the initial conference call because Associate Justice [[Harlan Fiske Stone]], one of the three liberal justices who continuously voted to uphold New Deal legislation, was absent due to an illness;<ref name="McKenna"/>{{rp|414}} with this even division on the Court, the holding of the [[Washington Supreme Court]], finding the minimum wage statute constitutional, would stand. As Hughes desired a clear and strong 5–4 affirmation of the Washington Supreme Court judgment, rather than a 4–4 default affirmation, he convinced the other justices to wait until Stone's return before both deciding and announcing the case.<ref name="McKenna"/>{{rp|414}}

===US Supreme Court cases===
Two [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]] rulings affirmed the constitutionality of the Social Security Act.
* ''[[Steward Machine Company v. Davis]]'', 301 U.S, 548<ref name="www.oyez.org.654">{{cite web|title=''Steward Machine Company vs. Davis'', 301 U.S, 548 |url=https://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/368/ |accessdate=December 3, 2005 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20051128231948/https://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/368/ |archivedate=November 28, 2005 }}</ref> (1937) held, in a 5–4 decision, that, given the exigencies of the [[Great Depression]], "[It] is too late today for the argument to be heard with tolerance that in a crisis so extreme the use of the moneys of the nation to relieve the unemployed and their dependents is a use for any purpose narrower than the promotion of the [[Common good|general welfare]]". The arguments opposed to the Social Security Act (articulated by justices [[Pierce Butler (justice)|Butler]], [[James Clark McReynolds|McReynolds]], and [[George Sutherland|Sutherland]] in their opinions) were that the social security act went beyond the powers that were granted to the federal government in the [[United States Constitution|Constitution]]. They argued that, by imposing a tax on employers that could be avoided only by contributing to a state [[Unemployment benefit|unemployment-compensation]] fund, the federal government was essentially forcing each state to establish an unemployment-compensation fund that would meet its criteria, and that the federal government had no power to enact such a program.
* ''[[Helvering v. Davis]]'', 301 U.S. 619 (1937), decided on the same day as ''Steward'', upheld the program because "The proceeds of both [employee and employer] taxes are to be paid into the Treasury like internal-revenue taxes generally, and are not earmarked in any way". That is, the Social Security Tax was constitutional as a mere exercise of Congress's general taxation powers.

===Other cases===
*''[[Flemming v. Nestor]]'', 363 US 603 (1960) upholding §1104, allowing Congress to itself amend and revise the schedule of benefits. Further, however, recipients of benefits had no contractual rights to them.
*''[[Goldberg v. Kelly]]'' 397 US 254 (1970) [[William J. Brennan Jr.|William Brennan, Jr.]] held there must be an evidentiary hearing before a recipient can be deprived of government benefits under the due process clause of the [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment]].
*''[[Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld]]'' (1975) held that a male widower should be entitled to his deceased wife's benefit just as a female widow was entitled to a deceased husband's, under the equal protection and due process clauses of the [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment]].

==See also==
* [[US labor law]]
* [[List of Social Security legislation (United States)]]

==Notes==
{{Reflist|2}}

==References==
*

{{Franklin D. Roosevelt}}
{{Ssusa|state=expanded}}

[[Category:1935 in law]]
[[Category:1935 in the United States]]
[[Category:74th United States Congress]]