The U.S. Supreme Court case California Department of Human Resources Development et al. v. Java et al., 1970, centered on the issue of unemployment compensation benefits and due process rights under the Social Security Act. The plaintiffs, Mr. and Mrs. Java, had their unemployment benefits suspended by the California Department of Human Resources Development while an appeal regarding their eligibility was pending - a process that could take several months to resolve in some cases. The Javas argued this practice violated their right to due process as it withheld crucial financial support without providing a timely hearing or decision on eligibility disputes first; they contended that such delays were contrary to federal requirements for "when due" payments under the Social Security Act. In its ruling, the Supreme Court sided with the Javas stating that suspending benefits during lengthy appeals processes did indeed violate claimants' rights to prompt payment as mandated by federal law unless there is a reasonable opportunity for a full fair pre-termination evidentiary hearing which wasn't provided in this case.

In the dissenting opinion for California Department of Human Resources Development et al. v. Java et al., Justice Harlan argued that the majority's interpretation of federal unemployment compensation law was overly broad and inconsistent with Congressional intent. He contended that Congress did not intend to impose a strict "when due" requirement on states, but rather sought to ensure general promptness in payment distribution. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's view that state procedures must be subordinate to federal requirements, arguing instead for a more balanced approach respecting both state sovereignty and federal objectives. The justice also expressed concern about potential administrative burdens imposed by this ruling on already strained state agencies.