SOCIAL-SECURITY DISCRIMINATION AGAINST AFRICAN-AMERICANS - AN EQUAL-PROTECTION ARGUMENT

The Social Security Act was passed in the middle of the Great Depressi on to alleviate the terrible poverty in which many elderly Americans f ound themselves mired. Social Security was designed as an insurance pr ogram in which workers contribute during their working years and recei ve payments during retirement. On its face, the program is equitable, with all individuals-with few exceptions-required to pay taxes into th e program and all eligible to collect retirement benefits. However, th ere is an inherent inequality in Social Security due to differences in life expectancies. African Americans live an average of seven years l ess than do white Americans. Therefore, while all individuals pay into Social Security at the same rates, African Americans receive much les s from the program after retirement simply because they do not live as long. This Note argues that the inequalities resulting from such life expectancy differences violate the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection. It first outlines the Supreme Court's equal protection jur isprudence as it pertains to statistically-based claims of discriminat ion. It then explores the legislative history behind the original 1935 Social Security Act to illustrate how African Americans were intentio nally excluded from coverage. Given the fact that Congress has maintai ned Social Security despite the lingering discriminatory effects, the Note concludes that the program runs afoul of the equal protection gua rantee. Finally, this Note proposes a number of remedies by which the discriminatory effects of the Social Security program can be eliminate d. Congress may amend the program by expressly taking race into accoun t. The author argues that such a response would not itself be an equal protection violation. Alternatively, Congress may select from a numbe r of race-neutral remedies which are briefly explored.