Stopping Benefits Is Ruled Improper

[Guest guest]

THE NATION – Los Angeles Times – Dec. 8, 2005

Stopping Benefits Is Ruled Improper

A court questions the practice of cutting off Social Security checks

to suspected fugitives.

By Sandy Bergo, Special to The Times

WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court has notified the Social Security

Administration that its practice of cutting off benefit checks to

suspected fugitives is improperly denying aid to people who are not

fleeing authorities.

That practice, part of the Fugitive Felon Project to block benefits

to fleeing criminals, has canceled retirement or disability payments

to about 30,000 people since Social Security rolls came under review

this year, the agency said.

One who lost benefits was Felipe Oteze Fowlkes of New York. He also

was ordered to repay $4,100 in disability benefits he purportedly

received while a fugitive from charges in Virginia.

Federal law bars fugitives from receiving Social Security, food

stamps, subsidized housing or veterans benefits.

The U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals ruled, however, that officials

had failed to determine whether Fowlkes knew about the warrant and

had fled Virginia to evade prosecution.

" The statute does not permit the [social Security] commissioner to

conclude simply from the fact that there is an outstanding warrant

for a person's arrest that he is 'fleeing to avoid prosecution,' "

the court said in a 14-page ruling.

Although the Fugitive Felon Project began screening Social Security

retirement rolls for the first time this year, other federal

assistance rolls have been subject to computer matching under the

program since the late 1990s.

A Times report in February disclosed that some aid recipients lost

government benefits over unproven allegations, minor infractions or

long-dormant arrest warrants.

In the case of Fowlkes, diagnosed with a mental disorder that

qualified him for disability benefits, lawyer Gerald McIntyre of the

National Senior Citizen Law Center said his client was unaware a

warrant had been issued for his arrest.

In June 1999, Fowlkes was accused of shoplifting an electronic game

and a camera from a Wal-Mart in Blackstone, Va. Total value,

according to court records, was less than $200.

Fowlkes, who had a criminal record, returned to New York, his lawyer

said, believing no charges would be filed. But a Nottoway County

grand jury indicted him for felony larceny in September.

In a handwritten account to the court, Fowlkes said when he learned

about the warrant in 2000 he attempted to surrender to the chief of

police in Schenectady.

Virginia authorities declined to extradite him from New York,

however, undermining the claim that he was evading arrest.

" We are assessing all of the implications, which will include how we

address suspensions under the fleeing felon provisions of the act, "

Mark Lassiter, a Social Security spokesman, said in an e-mail

response to questions about the court decision.

For now, the ruling applies to Social Security recipients in New

York, Vermont and Connecticut.

Ironically, Fowlkes cannot receive benefits, despite the ruling. He

is serving time in a Massachusetts prison on unrelated charges.