Iyengar v. Barnhart

233 F. Supp. 2d 5 (D. D.C. 2002) ; Clearinghouse Number: 55071

Description

Social Security Administration Must Follow Notice and Comment Procedures Before Changing Policy on Issuing Social Security Numbers for Nonwork Purposes

Abstract

The district court ruled that Social Security Administration must follow the Administrative Procedure Act’s notice and comment procedures before revising a long-standing interpretation of agency’s regulation on nonworking aliens’ eligibility to receive social security numbers. The court also held that sovereign immunity barred plaintiffs’ damages claim. Plaintiffs, legal immigrants who are ineligible to work in the United States, reside in states that require applicants for driver’s licenses to have social security numbers, for which plaintiffs applied to agency. Under a new interpretation of its own regulations, agency denied plaintiffs’ applications for social security numbers. Plaintiffs challenged agency’s reversal of its past regulatory interpretation without using notice and comment rule making; plaintiffs also claimed that the new policy was inconsistent with federal law. The court said that the heart of the case lay in 20 C.F.R. § 422.104(a)(3), first promulgated in 1974. Section 422.104(a)(3) makes legal aliens who may not engage in employment eligible for social security numbers “only for a valid nonwork purpose.” The court noted that Social Security Administration had explicitly listed need for a state driver’s license as a “valid nonwork purpose” several times since 1980. In March 2002 agency adopted the rule that plaintiffs challenged; that rule, for the first time, listed obtaining a state driver’s license as an invalid nonwork purpose for which agency would not assign a social security number. Since the policy change was fundamentally inconsistent with the previous long-standing regulatory interpretation, the court held that agency was obligated to follow notice and comment procedures. The court did not address plaintiffs’ claim that the new policy violated the Social Security Act or agency’s own regulations.

Additional Information

Attorney Information
Docket Date
2002-11-26 00:00:00+00:00

Files

Filed under: