In the case of Acosta v. Louisiana Department of Health and Human Resources et al., 1985, the U.S Supreme Court examined whether a state could reduce Medicaid benefits to recipients without providing them with notice or an opportunity for a hearing. The plaintiff, Acosta, was receiving medical assistance under Louisiana's Medicaid program when his benefits were reduced due to budget cuts by the state department. He filed suit claiming that this reduction violated his rights under federal law and the Due Process Clause of Fourteenth Amendment as he was not given prior notice or chance for hearing before cutting off his aid. The court ruled in favor of Acosta stating that any changes affecting individual’s eligibility should be communicated through proper channels before implementation. It held that states must provide advance notice and an opportunity for a fair hearing before reducing Medicaid benefits which are essential needs-based public assistance programs. This ruling reinforced procedural safeguards ensuring individuals' right to due process is upheld even in administrative decisions concerning welfare entitlements.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Acosta v. Louisiana Department of Health and Human Resources argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law requiring nonresident aliens to pay higher tuition fees than residents was discriminatory and violated equal protection principles. The dissenters contended that while states have a legitimate interest in ensuring their resources are used for the benefit of their citizens, this does not justify discriminating against nonresidents based on alienage, which is an immutable characteristic over which individuals have no control. They further noted that such discrimination could deter talented foreign students from studying in U.S., thereby harming American universities' academic standing globally. Moreover, they pointed out that many nonresident aliens contribute significantly to their communities and should therefore be treated equally under the law.