Editing Social Security Act (section)

===U.S. Supreme Court cases===
Two [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]] rulings affirmed the constitutionality of the Social Security Act.
* ''[[Steward Machine Company v. Davis]]'', 301 U.S., 548<ref name="www.oyez.org.654">{{cite web|title=''Steward Machine Company vs. Davis'', 301 U.S, 548 |url=https://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/368/ |access-date=December 3, 2005 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051128231948/https://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/368/ |archive-date=November 28, 2005 }}</ref> (1937) held in a 5–4 decision that given the exigencies of the [[Great Depression]], "[It] is too late today for the argument to be heard with tolerance that in a crisis so extreme the use of the moneys of the nation to relieve the unemployed and their dependents is a use for any purpose narrower than the promotion of the [[general welfare]]." The arguments opposed to the Social Security Act articulated by justices [[Pierce Butler (justice)|Butler]], [[James Clark McReynolds|McReynolds]], and [[George Sutherland|Sutherland]] in their opinions were that the Social Security Act went beyond the powers that were granted to the federal government in the [[U.S. Constitution]]. They argued that by imposing a tax on employers that could be avoided only by contributing to a state [[unemployment benefit|unemployment-compensation]] fund, the federal government was essentially forcing each state to establish an unemployment-compensation fund that would meet its criteria and that the federal government had no power to enact such a program.
* ''[[Helvering v. Davis]]'', 301 U.S. 619 (1937), decided on the same day as ''Steward'', upheld the program: "The proceeds of both [employee and employer] taxes are to be paid into the Treasury like internal-revenue taxes generally, and are not earmarked in any way." That is, the Social Security Tax was constitutional as a mere exercise of Congress's general taxation powers.