Citation network
Heckler Vs. Mathews
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 05, 1984
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Relied / Followed
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 728 (1984) U.S. Supreme Court Heckler v. MathewsSearch
-
U.S. 728 (1984) Heckler v. MathewsSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
wives and widows were entitled to benefits without any such showing of dependency on their husbands. In Califano v. GoldfarbSearch
-
J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. JUSTICE BRENNAN delivered the opinion of the Court. Califano v. GoldfarbSearch
-
b), (c)(1)(C), and (f)(1)(D). In March, 1977, Califano v. GoldfarbSearch
-
affirmed two District Court decisions invalidating the dependency requirement for husbands' benefits. Califano v. SilbowitzSearch
-
Jablon v. CalifanoSearch
-
Id. at 4a, quoting Craig v. BorenSearch
-
of their government pensions. Id. at 9a. II Because it may affect our jurisdiction, see Linda R. S. v. RichardSearch
-
Gladstone, Realtors v. VillageSearch
-
Simon v. EasternSearch
-
Welsh v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 398 U. S. 333 , 398 U. S. 361 (1970) (Harlan, J., concurring in result). See Califano v. WestcottSearch
-
These decisions demonstrate that, like the right to procedural due process, see Carey v. PiphusSearch
-
and therefore as less worthy participants in the political community, Mississippi University for Women v. HoganSearch
-
from the favored class as well as by extension of benefits to the excluded class. Iowa-Des Moines National Bank v. BennettSearch
-
offset exception so that it does not incorporate a gender-based classification of the kind invalidated in Califano v. GoldfarbSearch
-
license a court to usurp the policymaking and legislative functions of duly elected representatives. Yu Con Eng v. TrinidadSearch
-
U. S. 500 , 271 U. S. 518 (1926). See NLRB v. CatholicSearch
-
Aptheker v. SecretarySearch
-
of State, 378 U. S. 500 , 378 U. S. 515 (1964), quoting Scales v. UnitedSearch
-
Women v. HoganSearch
-
statute to remain in effect for a limited period of time. See, e.g., Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. MarathonSearch
-
U. S. 97 , 404 U. S. 106 -107 (1971). See also Los Angeles Dept. of Water & Power v. ManhartSearch
-
for the statute at issue here. See Kirchberg v. FeenstraSearch
-
Personnel Administrator of Mass. v. FeeneySearch
-
U. S. 509 , 402 U. S. 514 , n. 4 (1971), quoting FPC v. TuscaroraSearch
-
Wengler v. DruggistsSearch
-
by the law in effect in January, 1977, that they would receive both full spousal benefits and a government pension. v. TheSearch
-
Act, while temporarily reviving the gender-based classification Page 465 U. S. 751 invalidated in Califano v. GoldfarbSearch
-
E.g., Wengler v. DruggistsSearch
-
U. S. 199 , 430 U. S. 212 (1977) (plurality opinion). See Baker v. CarrSearch
-
Linda R. S. v. RichardSearch
-
States, 398 U.S. at 398 U. S. 365 (Harlan, J., concurring in result). See also Califano v. WestcottSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Heckler v. MathewsSearch
-
In Califano v. GoldfarbSearch
-
of the Court. Califano v. GoldfarbSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial