Sullivan v. Stroop

Summary

Chief Justice Rehnquist's majority opinion held that Title II Social Security child's insurance benefits are not child support payments eligible for the $50 AFDC income disregard and reversed the Fourth Circuit. The statutory text and structure use child support as a term of art referring to payments from absent parents. Encouraging those payments supplies a rational basis for treating them differently from government-funded insurance benefits. Justice Blackmun, joined by Justices Brennan and Marshall, dissented, arguing that the provision's inclusive language and mitigating purpose encompass Title II benefits and that the Secretary's exclusion was arbitrary. Justice Stevens separately dissented, finding that ordinary usage and Congress's purpose of mitigating hardship and promoting equal aid supported affirmance.