Martinez Settlement: SSA Fleeing Felon Policy and Back Benefits

The Martinez settlement is a 2009 nationwide class action agreement in which the Social Security Administration agreed to stop suspending or denying benefits based only on the existence of an outstanding felony arrest warrant, to reinstate people whose benefits had been cut off under that policy, and to repay an estimated $700 million to roughly 80,000 people, with further relief reaching individuals affected as far back as 2000.¹² The case, Martinez v. Astrue, was filed in the Northern District of California and given final approval by Judge Claudia A. Wilken on September 24, 2009.³

What the SSA Was Doing Before

The 1996 welfare reform law made a person ineligible for Supplemental Security Income during any month they were “fleeing to avoid prosecution” for a felony.⁴ The SSA carried this out by matching benefit rolls against warrant databases from the FBI, U.S. Marshals Service, and National Crime Information Center. If a beneficiary’s name turned up on a warrant, the agency suspended payments. Between September 1996 and April 2007, about 323,000 people lost benefits this way.⁵

The plaintiffs’ argument was that the statute required the SSA to find that a person was actually fleeing, meaning they knew about the charge and were trying to avoid it. The agency had skipped that step and treated the warrant itself as proof.⁶ The result caught people who had no idea a warrant existed, people charged with minor offenses, and people misidentified because they shared a name or birthdate with someone else.⁷

The lead plaintiff, Rosa Martinez, was a 52-year-old disabled woman in Redwood City, California. In December 2008 the SSA suspended her disability benefits, her only income, because of a 1980 drug warrant out of Miami. She had never been to Miami, had never been arrested, and was eight inches shorter than the person named in the warrant. The SSA would not let her appeal until the warrant was cleared.⁸

What the Settlement Changed Going Forward

Effective April 1, 2009, the SSA can suspend or deny benefits based on a felony warrant only if the warrant carries one of three specific NCIC offense codes:

4901 – escape from custody
4902 – flight to avoid prosecution or confinement
4999 – flight-escape

Those three categories are a small fraction of the 424 warrant types in the NCIC system.⁷ The same three codes now govern whether someone can serve as a representative payee.⁹ Any warrant outside those three codes is no longer a basis for cutting off Social Security, SSI, or Special Veterans Benefits. That policy change remains permanent SSA policy.¹⁰

The settlement does not reach benefit suspensions based on parole or probation violations. Those were handled in a separate case, Clark v. Astrue.⁷

Who Was Covered and What They Got Back

Retroactive relief was sorted into three groups by the date benefits were first cut off.

Suspensions on or After January 1, 2007

People in this group, along with anyone whose administrative appeal was still pending as of August 11, 2008, were entitled to have their benefits reinstated, to be paid all withheld benefits retroactive to the first month of suspension, and to be refunded any overpayments the SSA had already collected under the old policy.¹

Suspensions Between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2006

This group received cancellation of any remaining overpayment balance from the old policy and an end to further overpayment collections. They were allowed to reapply, and those who responded within six months of the SSA’s notice were given a protective filing date of April 1, 2009, which preserved earlier eligibility for the new application.¹

Suspensions Before January 1, 2000

People affected before 2000 could reapply under the new policy but were not sent individual notices and did not get the protective filing date.¹

How the payments actually went out depended on the benefit type. Social Security beneficiaries in the post-2006 class were generally reinstated automatically, with retroactive payments issued without a field office visit. SSI recipients had to confirm current financial eligibility at a scheduled appointment and were required to respond within 60 days. Informational notices went out in waves from December 2009 through late 2010.²⁹

One important limit came from Congress, not the court. Less than three months after final approval, the No Social Security Benefits for Prisoners Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-115) was signed on December 15, 2009. It barred the SSA from paying retroactive Martinez benefits to anyone who was, at the time of payment, a prisoner, a fugitive felon, or a probation or parole violator. Class members in one of those categories cannot receive their back benefits until that status changes.⁹

A March 2016 audit by the SSA Office of Inspector General reported that the agency had delivered about $224.7 million in relief to roughly 98,260 class members, a 93 percent success rate, and had improperly processed or failed to process about $51 million in relief for about 7,700 class members. The OIG found no common pattern in the errors and recommended that SSA correct 20 specific sampled cases, which the agency agreed to do.¹¹ Advocacy groups reported that field office staff were often unclear on the settlement’s terms and that the agency’s internal policy manuals still contained old fleeing-felon language after the change, which created problems for class members trying to get benefits restored.⁷

Does the Settlement Still Apply Today

Yes. The SSA’s internal procedures for handling Martinez cases were last revised in January 2024 and remain active. The agency still maintains a dedicated email address for Martinez-related Medicare questions, and field offices continue to follow settlement-specific procedures for verifying addresses, processing retroactive payments, and handling cases that need manual review. Class members whose monthly benefits have resumed remain subject to normal continuing disability reviews.¹⁰ The underlying rule, that a warrant outside NCIC codes 4901, 4902, and 4999 is not a basis to suspend benefits, is now permanent policy rather than a temporary fix tied to the case.

1
Social Security Administration. Martinez Settlement
2
Justice in Aging. Advocate Guide: Understanding the Martinez Settlement
3
Social Security Administration. Martinez Court Approval Order
4
Social Security Administration. SSA History – Chapter 6
5
New Politics. Crime and Poverty
6
Disability Rights California. Martinez v. Astrue
7
Justice in Aging. Martinez Advocate Guide
8
National Senior Citizens Law Center Archives. Martinez v. Astrue Plaintiff Profiles
9
Social Security Administration. HALLEX I-5-4-69: Martinez v. Astrue
10
Social Security Administration. POMS GN 02613.870: Martinez Settlement Processing
11
Social Security Administration Office of Inspector General. SSA Compliance With the Martinez Fugitive Settlement