Goldfarb and Mathews: legal challenges to the dependency test for spouse's benefits.

Changes in the eligibility criteria for a survivor's benefit under the Social Security program resulted from a 1977 Supreme Court decision in the case of Califano v. Goldfarb. The Court ruled that legislation that required only men to prove past financial dependence on a deceased spouse in order to establish eligibility to a survivor's benefit violated equal protection guarantees in the Constitution. In a 5-4 decision, the majority of the Supreme Court Justices determined the constitutionality of the gender-based distinction by applying the heightened scrutiny test. For a statutory gender-based classification to be found constitutional under the test, the government must show that (1) use of a gender-based classification serves an important governmental purpose and (2) a direct and substantial relationship exists between the gender-based classification and the purported objective. The majority of the Court found the sex-based distinction was based on sexist assumptions about women, was not formulated to serve an important governmental objective, and, thus, was unconstitutional. Amid projections that elimination of the dependency test for men would increase annual Social Security benefit expenditures by as much as +500 million, Congress enacted a government pension offset provision to help minimize the cost increase. It required that any spouse or survivor who received or was eligible to receive a pension for his or her own work in noncovered public employment would have his or her Social Security surviving spouse's or dependent's benefit reduced dollar-for-dollar by the amount of the work-related pension. An exception clause was included in that legislation.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)