The th and th Amendment Due Process

The concept of due process is one of the important principles in the United States Constitution and judicial process. It is an old notion that started vaguely in the Magna Carta of England (Kohn, 2013). In the U.S. Constitution, the due process clause is in the 5th and 14th amendments. The due process clause in the U.S. Constitution requires fundamental procedural fairness and the respect of an individuals legal rights by the state. Under the 5th and 14th amendments, due process is classified into two i.e. procedural due process and substantive due process. The due process doctrine has been the subject of numerous judicial considerations including in the Matthews v. Eldridge case. This paper examines this case in terms of whether it provides sufficient guidelines for a court to ascertain whether procedural due process has been properly provided.

The Matthews v. Eldridge Case

As noted by Kohn (2013), Matthews v. Eldridge is one of the 20th Century cases relating to the doctrine of due process. George Eldridge was a beneficiary of Social Security disability benefits from June 1968 due to chronic anxiety and back strain. Eldridge was later found to have diabetes and was informed by a letter from the state agency that his disability status was ending and his benefits would be terminated in May 1972. Eldridge responded by stating that he had arthritis of the spine and not a strained back. He also stated his belief that the state agency had sufficient information to establish his disability. However, the state agency upheld its decision, which was also accepted by the Social Security Administration (SSA). SSA notified him that his benefits would end after a month and his right of reconsideration by the agency within 6 months. Eldridge challenges the constitutionality of the termination of his benefits at the district court on grounds that due process was not followed based on the Fifth Amendment. SSA procedures provided for sufficient notification and evidentiary hearing prior to a final determination....…administrative procedures proved that procedural due process was followed in terminating Eldridges Social Security disability benefits.

The three-part balancing test announced by the Supreme Court that must be applied by lower courts in analysis cases on procedural due process provides sufficient guidelines. Matthews test provides sufficient guidelines for courts to determine procedural due process issues by promoting holistic and objective analysis. In this case, the courts consider the various administrative processes before ruling on whether due process was violated. These guidelines ensure that courts adopt a holistic view and approach rather than rely on only one or some parts of the administrative procedures.

In conclusion, due process is one of the important clauses and principles in the U.S. Constitution as established in the Fifth and Fourteenth amendments. Due process, which is classified into procedural and substantive due process, has been the subject of several cases and legal disputes such as the Matthews v. Eldridge case. While the lower courts ruled in favor of Eldridge, the Supreme Court overturned the ruling. The Court announced…