claim: says the u.s. supreme court found that "social security is not guaranteed."
author: david jolly
evidence_1: nov 25, 1998 ... nestor, the u.s. supreme court ruled that workers have no legally ... the  supreme court disagreed, saying “to engraft upon the social security system a  ... own retirement money, privatization would guarantee the security of ...
evidence_2: this was a new untested area of federal authority and it was inevitable that it  would be challenged in the courts, and until the supreme court ruled, no one  could ...
evidence_3: flemming v. nestor, 363 u.s. 603 (1960), was a united states supreme court  case in which ... the court ruled that no such contract exists, and that there is no  contractual right to receive social security payments. payments due under social  security are not “property” rights and are not protected by the takings clause of ...
evidence_4: in this 1960 supreme court decision nestor's denial of benefits was upheld even  ... flemming v. nestor. case name: flemming v. nestor 363 u.s. 603. no.  54. ... for summary judgment, the district court ruled for  appellee, .... (fn6) it is said that the termination of appellee's  benefits ...
evidence_5: jan 23, 2013 ... this post was prompted by all-too-common opinions expressed in randall  holcombe's recent “federal government debt undermines the ...