Shapiro v. Doe

Background

This dispute involves Connecticut welfare officials and a woman who sought aid for her illegitimate child. A three-judge federal district court ruled that a Connecticut regulation requiring the mother to give the father’s name before receiving welfare was invalid because it added a condition not required or authorized by the Social Security Act. The state officials filed a direct appeal to this Court. The notice of appeal was filed on September 2, 1969, and Rule 13(1) gives sixty days to docket such appeals, a period that expired on November 1, 1969; the appeal was not docketed until November 3, 1969.

Reasoning

The Court issued a per curiam order granting the woman's request to proceed without fees and then dismissed the appeal for failing to meet Rule 13(1)'s docketing deadline. The dismissal rested on the timing rule rather than the merits of the welfare regulation. Justice Black, joined by Justice Douglas, dissented. He argued that the delay was a minor, technical infraction—two days late with one day a Sunday—and that time defects of this sort do not become jurisdictional and can be waived. He said the case raised an important federal question and should be decided on the merits.

Real world impact

Because the Court dismissed the appeal on procedural grounds, the district court’s decision invalidating the Connecticut regulation stands for now. Mothers who had been required to name fathers and Connecticut welfare officials are directly affected. The Supreme Court did not rule on the lawfulness of the rule itself, so the legal question remains unresolved and could be revisited.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Black would have waived the time defect, noted probable jurisdiction, and reached the merits to decide whether the regulation was authorized.