8 U.S.C. § 1615

Requirements relating to provision of benefits based on citizenship, alienage, or immigration status under the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, the Child Nutrition Act of 1966, and certain other Acts

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 8 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) School lunch and breakfast programs

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, an individual who is eligible to receive free public education benefits under State or local law shall not be ineligible to receive benefits provided under the school lunch program under the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751 et seq.) or the school breakfast program under section 4 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773) on the basis of citizenship, alienage, or immigration status.

(b) Other programs(1) In general

Nothing in this Act shall prohibit or require a State to provide to an individual who is not a citizen or a qualified alien, as defined in section 1641(b) of this title, benefits under programs established under the provisions of law described in paragraph (2).

(2) Provisions of law describedThe provisions of law described in this paragraph are the following:(A) Programs (other than the school lunch program and the school breakfast program) under the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751 et seq.) and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.).(B) Section 4 of the Agriculture and Consumer Protection Act of 1973 (7 U.S.C. 612c note).(C) The Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 [7 U.S.C 7501 et seq.].(D) The food distribution program on Indian reservations established under section 2013(b) of title 7.(Pub. L. 104–193, title VII, § 742, Aug. 22, 1996, 110 Stat. 2307; Pub. L. 106–78, title VII, § 752(b)(6), Oct. 22, 1999, 113 Stat. 1169.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

This Act, referred to in subsecs. (a) and (b)(1), is Pub. L. 104–193, Aug. 22, 1996, 110 Stat. 2105, known as the “Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996”. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title of 1996 Amendment note set out under section 1305 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, and Tables.

The Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, referred to in subsecs. (a) and (b)(2)(A), is act June 4, 1946, ch. 281, 60 Stat. 230, which is classified generally to chapter 13 (§ 1751 et seq.) of Title 42. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1751 of Title 42 and Tables.

The Child Nutrition Act of 1966, referred to in subsec. (b)(2)(A), is Pub. L. 89–642, Oct. 11, 1966, 80 Stat. 885, which is classified generally to chapter 13A (§ 1771 et seq.) of Title 42. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1771 of Title 42 and Tables.

Section 4 of the Agriculture and Consumer Protection Act of 1973, referred to in subsec. (b)(2)(B), is section 4 of Pub. L. 93–86, which is set out as a note under section 612c of Title 7, Agriculture.

The Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983, referred to in subsec. (b)(2)(C), is title II of Pub. L. 98–8, Mar. 24, 1983, 97 Stat. 35, which is classified generally to chapter 102 (§ 7501 et seq.) of Title 7, Agriculture. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 7501 of Title 7, and Tables.

Codification

Section was enacted as part of title VII of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, and not as part of title IV of that Act which comprises this chapter.

Amendments

1999—Pub. L. 106–78 substituted “Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act” for “National School Lunch Act” in section catchline and in two places in text.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 2000–2000 · leading case: Lewis v. Grinker

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Lewis v. Grinker (2000) nyed · cites it 2× “See 8 U.S.C. § 1615 (West Supp.1999). FACTS The basic facts relevant to this application are not disputed.”

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.