Martin on Social Security

Part 2 – Topics

§ C 100. Protection of Benefits From Assignment or Garnishment

The Act protects benefits from attachment or garnishment by others.  It denies individuals the power to assign or otherwise transfer future benefits.  State law procedures that are inconsistent with this protection are overridden or preempted.  Congress has enacted a few exceptions to this general bar.  One applies to legal obligations to make child support or alimony payments; another, to federally reinsured student loans..

In Bennett v. Arkansas, 485 U.S. 395 (1988), the Supreme Court struck down an Arkansas statute that attached benefits paid to prisoners.  The decision rested on the Social Security Act and the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

In Philpott v. Essex County Welfare Bd., 409 U.S. 413 (1973), the Supreme Court held that the Act bars a state’s recovery of past welfare benefits from Social Security benefits.  This bar exists even when the Social Security benefits relate to the period covered by the welfare payments and would have reduced those payments if they had in fact been paid during that period.

However, in Washington State Dep’t of Soc. & Health Servs. v. Estate of Keffeler, 537 U.S. 371 (2003), the Supreme Court upheld a state agency’s use of Social Security benefits paid to it as “representative payee” on behalf of child recipients.  The state, in this case, reimbursed itself for foster care expenditures to those same recipients.

Generally Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits receive the same protections from attachment as Social Security benefits.  There is one exception to this rule; SSI does allow reimbursement of state general assistance payments made while an SSI claim was pending.

Rev. 11/07

[Supporting and Elaborating References] [Related Sections: Part 1 - Part 2]

§ C 200. Appointment and Duties of a Representative Payee

When the Agency determines that an individual is not able to manage benefit payments it can make payments to a representative payee.  This decision is independent of state competency determinations although a state determination of incompetency will prompt representative payment.  The representative payee can be an individual or an organization.  The regulations lay out preferences and standards that apply in selection of representative payees.  They also spell out the responsibilities and accountability of such payees, as well as the Agency’s financial responsibility for their adequate supervision.  The Act’s provisions dealing with these matters were substantially strengthened in 2004.

Rev. 12/04

[Supporting and Elaborating References] [Related Sections: Part 1 - Part 2]