Facts
The X. family entered Switzerland in September 1999 and applied for asylum. After negative asylum decisions, the Federal Office for Refugees ordered the temporary admission of the family on April 30, 2001 due to the unreasonableness of the deportation. The social assistance authority calculated the welfare for the family from July 1, 2001 according to the rates of the cantonal asylum ordinance, which are lower than the rates of the cantonal social assistance ordinance and the SKOS guidelines. The appellants requested that the support services be calculated according to the SKOS guidelines, which was rejected by the cantonal authorities. They then filed a constitutional appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court first examines whether the Cantonal Asylum Ordinance has a sufficient legal basis in cantonal law. It concludes that the establishment of guidelines on the type and extent of support services for the needy does constitute a fundamental and important subject matter that should be regulated in a formal law. However, the Cantonal Asylum Ordinance can still claim validity based on the constitutional transitional provision in § 148 para. 1 of the Cantonal Constitution.
Furthermore, the Federal Supreme Court states that temporarily admitted foreigners, like asylum seekers without a residence permit, can be…