Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on “Life and Liberty” in Two Supreme Court Cases. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
A 7 page paper comparing the concept of “life and liberty” in the context of two Supreme Court cases. The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States declares that neither states nor the federal government shall “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” The primary issues in both Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970) and Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976) is that of due process. The complaint of each is that individuals have been denied liberty as a result of having been denied due process, but the Court decidedly differently in each case based on the different entitlement programs contained in each. Bibliography lists 4 sources.
Page Count:
7 pages (~225 words per page)
File: CC6_KSlawLifeLiberty.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States declares that neither states nor the federal government shall "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due
process of law." The primary issues in both Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970) and Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976) is that of due process.
The complaint of each is that individuals have been denied liberty as a result of having been denied due process. The Oxford
Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States reports that the central aim of "due process doctrine is to assure fair procedure when the government imposes a burden on
an individual. The doctrine seeks to prevent arbitrary government, avoid mistaken deprivations, allow persons to know about and respond to charges against them, and promote a sense of the legitimacy
of official behavior" (The "Gold Bullet" Article). Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970) Appellees are New York City residents receiving welfare payments
in the form of the federally-assisted Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program or New York States general Home Relief program. Appellees "allege that officials administering these programs
terminated, or were about to terminate, such aid without prior notice and hearing, thereby denying them due process of law" (Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254). The District Court
held that as welfare benefits result from statutory entitlement for those qualified to receive them, "procedural due process is applicable to their termination" (Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254).
The District Court further held that the interest of the individual meeting eligibility requirements and receiving welfare benefits lies in continuing "uninterrupted receipt of
...