In the Goldberg v. Kelly case of 1969, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that terminating public assistance benefits without first conducting a hearing violated due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. The plaintiffs were recipients of financial aid from New York City's Department of Social Services who had their benefits cut off without prior notice or opportunity to challenge it. They argued this action was unconstitutional as it denied them procedural due process rights. The court agreed with them in a 5-3 decision, stating that welfare benefits are not merely "privileges" but more akin to "property" which cannot be taken away without proper legal procedure and fair hearing where evidence can be presented by both parties involved.

In the dissenting opinion for Goldberg v. Kelly, Justice Black argued that due process does not require a hearing before termination of welfare benefits. He believed that such hearings would place an undue burden on administrative agencies and could potentially lead to abuse by those seeking to manipulate the system. Furthermore, he contended that requiring pre-termination hearings was inconsistent with past court rulings which did not mandate formal procedures in every situation where government action might affect individual rights or interests. Justice Harlan also dissented, arguing that while some form of hearing may be necessary prior to terminating public assistance payments, it need not conform strictly to traditional judicial standards; rather it should be tailored according to practical needs and requirements of context.