InsideGov
Supreme Court · Decisions

Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Zebley et al.

In a case about determining childhood Social Security disability benefits, the Court ruled that substantial parts of the SSI program's regulation on childhood disability were inconsistent with the Social Security Act's "comparable severity" standard.· AI-written

493 U.S. 521 · No. 88-1377 · 1989 term · Rehnquist Court

Decided Feb 20, 1990 · argued Nov 28, 1989

Civil rights · Poverty law, statutory: welfare benefits, typically under some Social Security Act provision

Landmark

Majority opinion: Harry Blackmun

The voteMajorityDissent

7–27 in the majority, 2 in dissent

2 dissents (7–2)

Affirmed. Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services lost.

What this ruling means

Affirmed: the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit, so it stands (sometimes with changes the Court made to it).

Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services was the petitioner, the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the case. “Lost” means the Court did not give that side the result it asked for.

From the Supreme Court Database. A justice who agreed with the result but not the reasoning counts in the majority.

Report a correction

Summary

The opening of the case’s Wikipedia article: what the case was about and what the Court held.

Sullivan v. Zebley, 493 U.S. 521 (1990), was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court involving the determination of childhood Social Security Disability benefits. In the decision, the Supreme Court ruled that substantial parts of the Supplemental Security Income program's regulation on determining disability for children were inconsistent with the Social Security Act, particularly the statutory standard of "comparable severity". The suit highlighted what some felt was the need for a step in the evaluation of childhood disability claims that would be akin to the functional evaluation considered in many adult claims. It resulted in the addition of a consideration of functioning, and not merely medical severity, in children's SSI claims. The decision was rendered on February 20, 1990.

Read the full article on Wikipedia

Data notes

The text is Wikipedia’s (CC BY-SA 4.0), matched to the case by its citation, docket number or name and year, and is not checked against the opinion. The site keeps the article’s opening section, ending on its last full sentence. The one-sentence summary under the title is the Decisions list’s: Wikipedia’s own ruling sentence, or, tagged “AI-written”, one Claude wrote from this opening.

Report a correction

How the justices voted

Each justice who took part, placed by their Martin–Quinn ideology score for the 1989 term. Filled: the 7 in the majority. Hollow: the 2 in dissent. Colour is the party of the president who appointed them.

More liberalMore conservativeMedianMarshallBrennanStevensBlackmunWhiteKennedyO'ConnorScaliaRehnquist

Majority(7)

Dissent(2)

Data notes

Each justice’s vote and what they wrote are from the justice-centered file of the Supreme Court Database. “Wrote a concurrence” means the justice sided with the majority and wrote separately; a justice who dissented in part is counted on the side they took overall. A justice who wrote nothing is listed as joining their side.

Positions are each justice’s Martin–Quinn score for the case’s term, the same scores as the Ideology page: negative is more liberal, positive more conservative. A score sums up a justice’s votes across the whole term, so it says where they usually sit, not why they voted as they did here. The median line is the Court’s median justice that term.

Report a correction

The parties

Who brought the case to the Court, who answered it, and how it got there.

Petitioner
Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human ServicesDepartment or Secretary of Health and Human Services
Respondent
Zebley et al.Child, children
Reached the Court by
Certiorari (the Court chose to hear it)
Why it was taken
Federal appeals courts had ruled differently on the question
Data notes

The names are the two sides of the case’s title. The description under each is the Supreme Court Database’s category for that party, in its own wording. The petitioner is the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the decision below. “Why it was taken” appears only when the majority opinion says lower courts disagreed or were unsure about the question; reasons that would fit any case (“to resolve the question presented”, “an important question”) are left out.

Report a correction

The law at issue

The law the Court was asked to apply, and the kind of power it used to decide.

Provision
Supplemental Security Income
Kind of law
Federal Statute
Decided by
Statutory construction; Interpretation of administrative regulation or rule, or executive order
Data notes

The Supreme Court Database codes the main constitutional provision, statute or court rule each case turned on, and the basis of the decision: judicial review of a federal or state law, interpreting a statute, supervising the lower courts, and so on. A case can rest on more than one. “Overruled” counts only where the majority opinion says so.

Report a correction

Timeline

What happened at the Court and how the case got there, newest first.

  1. Feb 20, 1990DecidedDecided · Decided 7–2: affirmed. Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services lost.
  2. Nov 28, 1989ArguedArgued · Oral argument before the Court.
  3. Not datedTaken upTaken up · The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case (certiorari). Federal appeals courts had ruled differently on the question.
  4. Not datedCourt belowCourt below · Decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit: vacated.
  5. Not datedBeganBegan · The case began in the Pennsylvania Eastern U.S. District Court.
Data notes

From the Supreme Court Database: the court the case began in, the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed and what that court did, how the case came to the Court, and the dates of argument and decision. The database does not date the steps in the lower courts. Court names are the database’s.

Report a correction

Other decisions on the same issue

45 other argued cases since 1946 on poverty law, statutory: welfare benefits, typically under some Social Security Act provision, newest first.

  1. Biestek v. Berryhill139 S. Ct. 1148Apr 1, 2019 · 139 S. Ct. 1148Civil rights6–36–3 band

  2. Arkansas Department of Health and Human Services, et al. v. Heidi Ahlborn547 U.S. 268May 1, 2006 · 547 U.S. 268Civil rights9–0Unanimous band

  3. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner of Social Security v. Peabody Coal Company et al.537 U.S. 149Jan 15, 2003 · 537 U.S. 149Civil rights6–36–3 band

  4. Department of Housing and Urban Development v. Pearlie Rucker et al.535 U.S. 125Mar 26, 2002 · 535 U.S. 125Civil rights8–0Unanimous band

  5. Jeffrey Allan Fischer v. United States529 U.S. 667May 15, 2000 · 529 U.S. 667Civil rights7–27–2 band

  6. Eloise Anderson, Director, California Department of Social Services, et al. v. Verna Edwards, etc., et al.514 U.S. 143Mar 22, 1995 · 514 U.S. 143Civil rights9–0Unanimous band
  7. Henry G. Cisneros, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, et al. v. Alpine Ridge Group et al.508 U.S. 10May 3, 1993 · 508 U.S. 10Civil rights9–0Unanimous band
  8. Louis W. Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Elizabeth Stroop, et al.496 U.S. 478Jun 14, 1990 · 496 U.S. 478Civil rights5–45–4 band
  9. Louis W. Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al. v. Sandra Everhart et al.494 U.S. 83Feb 21, 1990 · 494 U.S. 83Civil rights5–45–4 band
  10. Sandra Gardebring, Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Human Services v. Kathryn Jenkins485 U.S. 415Apr 19, 1988 · 485 U.S. 415Civil rights5–36–3 band
  11. Bowen, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Yuckert482 U.S. 137Jun 8, 1987 · 482 U.S. 137Civil rights6–36–3 band
  12. Lukhard, Commissioner, Virginia Department of Social Services v. Reed et al.481 U.S. 368Apr 22, 1987 · 481 U.S. 368Civil rights5–45–4 band
  13. Atkins, Commissioner, Massachusetts Department of Public Welfare v. Rivera et al.477 U.S. 154Jun 23, 1986 · 477 U.S. 154Civil rights9–0Unanimous band
  14. Connecticut Department of Income Maintenance v. Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al.471 U.S. 524May 20, 1985 · 471 U.S. 524Civil rights9–0Unanimous band
  15. Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Turner et al.470 U.S. 184Feb 27, 1985 · 470 U.S. 184Civil rights9–0Unanimous band
  16. Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Day et al.467 U.S. 104May 22, 1984 · 467 U.S. 104Civil rights5–45–4 band
  17. Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Community Health Services of Crawford County, Inc., et al.467 U.S. 51May 21, 1984 · 467 U.S. 51Civil rights9–0Unanimous band
  18. Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Ringer et al.466 U.S. 602May 14, 1984 · 466 U.S. 602Civil rights6–36–3 band
  19. Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Campbell461 U.S. 458May 16, 1983 · 461 U.S. 458Civil rights8–18–1 band
  20. Blum, Commissioner, Department of Social Services of New York v. Bacon et al457 U.S. 132Jun 14, 1982 · 457 U.S. 132Civil rights9–0Unanimous band
  21. Herweg et vir v. Ray, Governor of Iowa, et al.455 U.S. 265Feb 23, 1982 · 455 U.S. 265Civil rights8–18–1 band
  22. Schweiker, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al. v. Gray Panthers453 U.S. 34Jun 25, 1981 · 453 U.S. 34Civil rights6–36–3 band
  23. Beltran v. Myers, Director, California State Department of Health, et al.451 U.S. 625May 18, 1981 · 451 U.S. 625Civil rights9–0Unanimous band
  24. Califano, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare v. Yamasaki et al.442 U.S. 682Jun 20, 1979 · 442 U.S. 682Civil rights8–0Unanimous band

  25. Alexander et al. v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development et al.441 U.S. 39Apr 17, 1979 · 441 U.S. 39Civil rights9–0Unanimous band
  26. Miller, Director, Department of Children and Family Services of Illinois, et al. v. Youakim et al.440 U.S. 125Feb 22, 1979 · 440 U.S. 125Civil rights8–0Unanimous band
  27. Quern, Director, Department of Public Aid of Illinois, et al. v. Mandley et al.436 U.S. 725Jun 6, 1978 · 436 U.S. 725Civil rights8–0Unanimous band
  28. Batterton, Secretary, Department of Human Resources of Maryland, et al. v. Francis et al.432 U.S. 416Jun 20, 1977 · 432 U.S. 416Civil rights5–45–4 band
  29. Ohio Bureau of Employment Services et al. v. Hodory431 U.S. 471May 31, 1977 · 431 U.S. 471Civil rights8–0Unanimous band
  30. Youakim et al. v. Miller, Director, Department of Children and Family Services, et al.425 U.S. 231Mar 31, 1976 · 425 U.S. 231Civil rights8–0Unanimous band
  31. Roe et al. v. Norton, Commissioner of Welfare422 U.S. 391Jun 24, 1975 · 422 U.S. 391Civil rights9–0Unanimous band
  32. Philbrook, Commissioner, Department of Social Welfare v. Glodgett et al.421 U.S. 707Jun 9, 1975 · 421 U.S. 707Civil rights9–0Unanimous band
  33. Van Lare, Acting Commissioner, Department of Social Services of New York, et al. v. Hurley et al.421 U.S. 338May 19, 1975 · 421 U.S. 338Civil rights8–18–1 band
  34. Lascaris, Commissioner, Department of Social Services of Onondaga County v. Shirley et al.420 U.S. 730Mar 19, 1975 · 420 U.S. 730Civil rights6–36–3 band
  35. Burns, Commissioner, Department of Social Services of Iowa, et al. v. Alcala et al.420 U.S. 575Mar 18, 1975 · 420 U.S. 575Civil rights7–18–1 band
  36. Shea, Executive Director, Department of Social Services of Colorado, et al. v. Vialpando416 U.S. 251Apr 23, 1974 · 416 U.S. 251Civil rights9–0Unanimous band
  37. Hagans et al. v. Lavine, Commissioner, New York Department of Social Services, et al.415 U.S. 528Mar 25, 1974 · 415 U.S. 528Civil rights6–36–3 band
  38. New York State Department of Social Services et al. v. Dublino et al.413 U.S. 405Jun 21, 1973 · 413 U.S. 405Civil rights7–27–2 band
  39. Philpott et al. v. Essex County Welfare Board409 U.S. 413Jan 10, 1973 · 409 U.S. 413Civil rights9–0Unanimous band
  40. Carleson, Director, Department of Social Welfare, et al. v. Remillard et al.406 U.S. 598Jun 7, 1972 · 406 U.S. 598Civil rights9–0Unanimous band
  41. Richardson, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare v. Wright et al.405 U.S. 208Feb 24, 1972 · 405 U.S. 208Civil rights6–36–3 band
  42. California Department of Human Resources Development et al. v. Java et al.402 U.S. 121Apr 26, 1971 · 402 U.S. 121Civil rights9–0Unanimous band
  43. Lewis et al. v. Martin, Director, California Department of Social Welfare, et al.397 U.S. 552Apr 20, 1970 · 397 U.S. 552Civil rights6–27–2 band
  44. Rosado et al. v. Wyman, Commissioner of Social Services of New York, et al.397 U.S. 397Apr 6, 1970 · 397 U.S. 397Civil rights6–27–2 band
  45. King, Commissioner, Department of Pensions and Security, et al. v. Smith et al.392 U.S. 309Jun 17, 1968 · 392 U.S. 309Civil rights9–0Unanimous band

Data notes

Every other orally argued case with a clear vote, from the 1946 term on, that the Supreme Court Database files under the same issue as this one. The database gives each case one issue from a list of about 270 (abortion, search and seizure of vehicles, the death penalty, and so on), whatever law it turned on.

Report a correction

Official record

Read the full opinion on Justia, the argument audio on Oyez and Wikipedia. Case data from the Supreme Court Database, Version 2026 Release 01, through the 2025 term.