In the case of Daniel, Director, Cook County Department of Public Aid, et al. v. Goliday et al., 1969, the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of the appellants (Daniel and others), reversing a previous decision by a three-judge District Court that had declared an Illinois statute unconstitutional. The contested statute required recipients of public aid to have resided within the state for at least one year before becoming eligible for assistance under its program funded jointly by federal and state governments. The Supreme Court held that this residency requirement did not violate either equal protection or due process clauses as argued by appellees (Goliday and others). It was determined that states can impose reasonable residency requirements on welfare recipients without infringing upon their constitutional rights.

In the dissenting opinion for Daniel, Director, Cook County Department of Public Aid, et al. v. Goliday et al., Justice Hugo Black argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law requiring residents to live in Illinois for at least one year before receiving welfare benefits was unconstitutional and violated equal protection rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. He contended that this ruling essentially allowed states to discriminate against new residents based on their financial status or need for assistance. Moreover, he believed it contradicted previous court decisions which had established that citizens have a fundamental right to travel between states without facing penalties or restrictions due solely to their migratory status. In his view, such residency requirements served no legitimate state interest and were therefore unjustifiable forms of discrimination.