Why might residency requirements for benefits be viewed as discriminatory?

Residency requirements for benefits can be viewed as discriminatory primarily because they often disadvantage transient populations. Individuals who may move frequently, such as students, migrant workers, or those experiencing homelessness, may not be able to establish the required residency in a particular area and thus become ineligible for benefits. This situation can create barriers for vulnerable groups who are in need of assistance, thereby raising concerns about equity and fairness.

In contrast, other options do not accurately explain the discriminatory nature of residency requirements. For instance, stating that they generally affect only low-income individuals does not capture the broader demographic impacts, as residency requirements can also affect middle-income and otherwise financially stable individuals who might be transient. The assertion that residency requirements are universally accepted by all states is inaccurate because many states have different policies on residency and may face legal challenges based on discriminatory implications. Lastly, if residency requirements apply equally to all applicants, the structure alone does not indicate discrimination; it is the effect of these requirements on specific groups that raises the concern of discrimination.