42 U.S.C. § 1351
Authorization of appropriations
For the purpose of enabling each State to furnish financial assistance, as far as practicable under the conditions in such State, to needy individuals eighteen years of age and older who are permanently and totally disabled, there is hereby authorized to be appropriated for each fiscal year a sum sufficient to carry out the purposes of this subchapter. The sums made available under this section shall be used for making payments to States which have submitted, and had approved by the Secretary, State plans for aid to the permanently and totally disabled.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 61
cases, 1954–1998 · leading case: Schweiker v. Wilson
Schweiker v. Wilson (1981)
“555 , as amended, 42 U. S. C. § 1351 et seq.; and Aid to the Aged, Blind, or Disabled, 76 Stat.”
Rosado v. Wyman (1970)
“; Aid to Families With Dependent Children (AFDC), 42 U.”
Snell v. Wyman (1968)
“The statutes plaintiffs attack reach only to property already owned or to acquisitions which have more or less the character of "windfalls" at least in the sense that such acquisitions do not result from purposeful efforts to "attain or retain capability for self-support or…”
Jefferson v. Hackney (1972)
“; APTD, 42 U. S. C. § 1351 et seq. No State is compelled to participate in any program, and any State that wants to participate can choose to do so in one, several, or all of the programs.”
Townsend v. Swank (1971)
“Thereafter she received an AFDC grant for Omega, and benefits for herself under the Aid to the Disabled provisions of the Social Security Act, 42 U. S. C. § 1351 et seq. In September 1966, Omega enrolled in junior college.”
Darces v. Woods (1984)
“); and Aid For the Permanently and Totally Disabled (APTD) ( 42 U.S.C. § 1351 et seq.). [8] Under the joint federal-state operation of the AFDC program, the states are delegated the responsibility to set the minimum levels of subsistence need which determine a family's…”
Califano v. Torres (1978)
“555 , 42 U. S. C. § 1351 et seq.; and Aid to the Aged, Blind, and Disabled, 42 U.”
Atkins v. Rivera (1986)
“); and Aid to the Permanently and Totally Disabled, 42 U. S. C. § 1351 et seq. (1970 ed.). These programs, together with AFDC, previously had been state administered with state-eligibility standards.”
Lampton v. Bonin (1969)
“§ 1201 , which deals with Aid to the Blind, and 42 U.S.C. § 1351 , which is concerned with Aid to the Permanently and Totally Disabled.”
Sullivan v. Day (1997)
“” 42 U.S.C. § 1351 (1970), repealed by Social Security Amendments of 1972, Pub.”
Saurino v. Weinberger (1975)
“See 42 U.S.C. § 1351 et seq.. However, under P.”
Duquette by and Through Duquette v. Dupuis (1984)
“42 U.S.C. §§ 1351 , 1381, and 1396d(a)(v).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.