Table of Contents
Introduction: The Case of the Phantom Fortune
An inquiry into the net worth of John Hinckley Jr., the man who attempted to assassinate President Ronald Reagan in 1981, begins with a set of seemingly solid assumptions.
Public accounts consistently describe him as the son of a wealthy oil executive, a man who came from a “top-drawer” family with “all the advantages”.1
The initial investigative path appears straightforward: trace the assets from the Hinckley family’s Vanderbilt Energy Corporation, examine property records, and uncover the remnants of a multimillion-dollar fortune.2
However, this conventional approach quickly leads to a dead end.
The trail of assets vanishes behind a wall of institutional privacy, sealed court proceedings, and the passage of over four decades.
Public financial records are non-existent.
The simple, direct question—”What is John Hinckley Jr. worth?”—proves unanswerable through standard financial forensics.
The initial frustration gives way to a critical realization: the question itself is flawed.
The true puzzle is not calculating a number to be entered on a balance sheet.
It is to understand a unique financial existence forged by a notorious act, a landmark legal verdict, and a lifetime of social and judicial constraints.
The central mystery is therefore reframed: How can the heir to an oil fortune have a net worth that is functionally impossible to calculate and perhaps meaningless in traditional terms? What defines the economic reality of a man whose life story is his most valuable, and yet most encumbered, asset? This report is a forensic investigation into that mystery, dissecting the legal and financial forces that have shaped the un-balance sheet of John Hinckley Jr.
Chapter 1: The Gilded Cage – Legacy of the Hinckley Fortune
The public perception of John Hinckley Jr.’s wealth is rooted in the verifiable success of his father.
John W.
Hinckley Sr. was the Chairman and President of Vanderbilt Energy Corporation, a multimillion-dollar oil and gas exploration firm he founded in 1970.2
The family enjoyed an affluent lifestyle, residing in exclusive areas like University Park, Texas, and later Evergreen, Colorado, in a home valued at $300,000 in 1981.2
This background provided John Jr. with what family associates called “all the advantages”.2
This financial cushion was not merely a backdrop to his life; it was an active agent in his story.
It funded a drifting, aimless existence, allowing him to be an intermittent student at Texas Tech University for seven years without ever earning a degree.6
It financed his move to Hollywood in 1976 to pursue a failing career as a songwriter.6
Most critically, it directly enabled the obsessions that would lead to his infamous crime.
In 1980, his parents provided him with $3,600, ostensibly to attend a writing course at Yale University.
Hinckley never enrolled; instead, he used the money to move to New Haven, Connecticut, to stalk the actress Jodie Foster, who was a student there.7
However, this parental support was finite.
By October 1980, the $3,600 was gone, and Hinckley returned home to Colorado penniless.7
His parents, increasingly concerned, sought psychiatric help for their son.
On the advice of psychiatrist Dr. John Hopper, they made the fateful decision to force their son toward emotional and financial independence by cutting off his support.3
Just one month before the assassination attempt, his father left him in Denver to find a cheap motel and make a life on his own.9
Jack Hinckley would later testify that this decision was “the greatest mistake of my life”.3
Psychiatric experts at the trial concurred, suggesting that severing this final tie to his family pushed him over the edge.3
From the very beginning, Hinckley’s relationship with money was profoundly dysfunctional.
The family fortune provided the unstructured freedom for his delusions to fester, directly funded the stalking that was central to his motive, and, in its final withdrawal, acted as a key precipitating factor for his violent act.
Wealth was both the enabler of his pathology and the catalyst for its ultimate expression.
Chapter 2: The Verdict’s Hidden Ledger – The Financial Reality of “Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity”
On June 21, 1982, a jury delivered a verdict that stunned the nation and irrevocably set the course for John Hinckley Jr.’s financial future.
He was found “not guilty by reason of insanity” (NGRI) on all 13 counts against him, including the attempted assassination of the President.10
The verdict did not mean he was innocent of the act, but that the jury believed his severe mental illness—diagnosed by defense experts as a psychosis—rendered him legally blameless.10
At the time, the burden of proof was on the prosecution to prove
beyond a reasonable doubt that Hinckley was sane, a burden they failed to meet.10
This NGRI verdict represents the single most important event in defining Hinckley’s economic life.
It diverted him from the path of a convicted felon, who would serve a finite sentence in a federal prison, to that of an insanity acquittee, who would be committed indefinitely to a psychiatric facility.8
He was sent to St. Elizabeths Hospital in Washington, d+.C., not to be punished, but to be treated.14
This distinction transformed his future from a matter of criminal justice to one of long-term medical care, with profound financial implications.
His confinement at St. Elizabeths lasted for 34 years.7
While the state bears the primary cost of such institutionalization, his eventual transition back into society became a significant private expense.
His release was not a single event but a slow, painstaking process spanning decades, involving court-supervised furloughs, gradual increases in freedom, and extensive psychiatric monitoring.7
The financial burden for this protracted transition fell squarely on his family.
His mother, Jo Ann Hinckley, paid for the elaborate treatment teams and all associated costs of his furloughs to her home in Williamsburg, Virginia, using what was described as the “family’s dwindling oil fortune”.19
The financial strain was considerable.
In 2014, Jo Ann Hinckley stated, “Expense-wise, I’m feeling overloaded,” and the family informed the court that their funds could cover perhaps five more years of his outpatient treatment.19
The NGRI verdict did not erase a “cost” from Hinckley’s life; it fundamentally altered its nature.
A prison sentence would have represented a finite penalty paid to the state.
Instead, the verdict created a lifelong, open-ended financial liability.
His “freedom” was not granted but purchased, piece by piece, through decades of expensive legal and medical proceedings that systematically drained his family’s private wealth.
This process fundamentally changed his inheritance from a potential asset into a dedicated expense account for his care and supervision.
Chapter 3: The $2.9 Million Lien on a Life Story
While the criminal trial concluded with the NGRI verdict, the civil courts provided a separate venue for Hinckley’s victims to seek monetary damages.
Three of the men wounded in the 1981 attack—White House Press Secretary James Brady, Secret Service agent Timothy McCarthy, and Washington, d+.C.
police officer Thomas Delahanty—filed civil lawsuits seeking compensation for their injuries.20
President Reagan, who was also wounded, did not participate in the suits.23
The plaintiffs’ legal strategy was multi-pronged.
They sued not only Hinckley but also his psychiatrist, Dr. John Hopper, for professional negligence, and the gun’s manufacturer, RG Industries (a subsidiary of Röhm GmbH), under a “Saturday Night Special” theory of liability.20
The cases against the third parties were ultimately unsuccessful.
The courts dismissed the suit against Dr. Hopper, ruling that Hinckley’s violent actions were not a foreseeable outcome of the treatment.20
Likewise, the court declined to hold the gun manufacturer liable for the criminal misuse of its product, rejecting the novel legal theory that such cheap, small handguns were inherently designed for crime.25
This left only the lawsuit against Hinckley himself, which culminated in the most critical financial event of his post-acquittal life: a 1995 settlement agreement.
This agreement did not involve a payment of existing funds, as Hinckley had no significant assets to his name.
Instead, it placed a lien on a future, speculative, and entirely intangible asset: the commercial value of his infamy.
Under the terms of the settlement, Hinckley agreed to furnish up to $2.9 million in potential proceeds from any book, movie, or other commercial account of his life story to the three victims.23
More importantly, the agreement stipulated that he would surrender all legal rights to his life story to a
trust controlled by Brady, McCarthy, and Delahanty.23
To facilitate this, Hinckley also agreed to turn over his “intellectual property”—a trove of nearly 100 boxes containing his personal letters, songs, memos, and a videotaped deposition—to the victims’ trust.23
The agreement allowed Hinckley to retain a small fraction of any proceeds for personal use ($3,000 per year while hospitalized, rising to $12,000 per year upon release), but the vast majority was legally earmarked for the men he injured.29
This settlement was a legal masterstroke that functioned as a pre-emptive seizure of Hinckley’s only valuable asset.
By transferring ownership and control of his narrative to the victims’ trust, the agreement ensured that any publisher, producer, or media outlet seeking the “official” story—complete with his extensive personal papers—would have to negotiate with and pay the victims, not Hinckley.
The settlement effectively stripped him of his ability to profit from his own notoriety, creating a permanent financial encumbrance that ensures the more valuable his story becomes, the less access he has to that value.
| Case/Plaintiffs | Claim | Outcome |
| Brady, McCarthy, & Delahanty v. John J. Hopper, Jr. (Psychiatrist) | Negligence in diagnosis and treatment, creating an unreasonable risk of harm. | Dismissed. The court ruled the harm was not foreseeable.20 |
| Delahanty, Brady, & McCarthy v. RG Industries, Inc. & ROEHM GmbH (Gun Manufacturer) | Strict liability for manufacturing and distributing a “Saturday Night Special” principally used in crime. | Dismissed. The court declined to adopt the “Saturday Night Special” theory of liability.25 |
| Brady, McCarthy, & Delahanty v. John W. Hinckley, Jr. | Damages for injuries sustained in the 1981 shooting. | Settled (1995). Hinckley surrendered rights to his life story and up to $2.9 million in potential future proceeds to a trust controlled by the plaintiffs.23 |
Chapter 4: The Paradox of Profit – Barred by the “Son of Sam”
Beyond the civil settlement, another powerful legal mechanism stands to block John Hinckley Jr. from ever profiting from his crime: “Son of Sam” laws.
These are statutes, first enacted in New York in 1977 and later adopted by many other states, designed to prevent criminals from capitalizing on their notoriety.30
They typically require that any income a person derives from selling the story of their crime—through books, films, or interviews—be placed in an escrow account for the benefit of their victims.31
The public outrage that followed the Hinckley verdict in 1982, with 83% of Americans polled believing “justice was not done,” spurred a wave of legislative reform.10
This included significant changes to the “Son of Sam” framework.
A critical legal question arose: should these laws apply to an individual found not guilty by reason of insanity? Legally, an NGRI verdict establishes that the defendant committed no “wrong” because they lacked the necessary criminal intent (
mens rea).33
In other areas of law, this distinction is paramount.
For example, an insane individual who kills a relative can, in some jurisdictions, still inherit from their victim’s estate precisely because they are not considered legally culpable for the death.33
However, in the wake of the Hinckley case, legislatures moved to close this perceived loophole.
An analysis of New York’s “Son of Sam” statute reveals a deliberate and constitutionally contentious provision.
For the purposes of the statute, “a person found not guilty as a result of the defense of mental disease or defect…
shall be deemed to be a convicted person”.33
Other states, such as Iowa, followed this model, explicitly including those “found not guilty by reason of insanity” within the law’s reach.32
This legislative action created a profound legal paradox specifically for Hinckley and others like him.
For the purpose of criminal punishment, the justice system deemed him not a criminal.
Yet for the purpose of financial profit derived from his story, the law treats him as if he were a convicted felon.
This is not a legal oversight but a direct expression of public policy, prioritizing moral outrage and victim compensation over the technicalities of legal insanity.
This framework acts as a financial checkmate, reinforcing the 1995 civil settlement.
Hinckley’s notoriety is his only potential source of significant wealth.
However, the moment he might attempt to convert that notoriety into cash, he triggers a legal structure specifically designed to confiscate it.
He is trapped in a legal pincer movement: the civil settlement seized control of his story’s rights, and “Son of Sam” laws stand as a formidable backstop to seize any profits that might somehow slip through.
This ensures that his net worth is not merely low; it is actively and legally suppressed by a system designed to prevent its growth.
Chapter 5: The Gig Economy of a Notorious Man
Since his unconditional release from all court-ordered supervision in June 2022, John Hinckley Jr.’s attempts to generate income paint a picture of subsistence, not wealth.7
His financial activities are confined to a small-scale, online “gig economy,” where his notoriety is both his only selling point and his greatest obstacle.
His primary venture is Music. Having dreamed of being a songwriter since he was a young man, he now maintains a YouTube channel with over 42,000 subscribers, where he posts videos of himself performing earnest, folk-style original songs and covers.7
He also releases music on streaming platforms like Spotify and sells paintings, often of his cat, on eBay.7
He has stated that this generates “just enough income…
to pay his bills”.41
The severe limitations on his earning potential were starkly illustrated by his attempt to launch a “Redemption Tour” in 2022.
Concerts booked in Brooklyn, Chicago, and Connecticut quickly sold out, demonstrating a clear market interest driven by morbid curiosity.36
However, every single venue canceled the shows following intense public backlash and security threats.36
This experience, which led Hinckley to declare himself a “victim of cancel culture,” shows that even when a legal pathway to earning money exists, the court of public opinion can act as a powerful economic sanction.40
The social and security risks for venues—brand damage, protests, potential violence—created a negative financial externality that far outweighed the revenue from ticket sales.
The question of his underlying financial support remains opaque.
His father, Jack Hinckley, died in 2008, and his mother, Jo Ann, who was his primary caregiver after his release from St. Elizabeths, died in 2021.7
Given the family’s initial wealth, the immense and prolonged legal and medical expenses, and Hinckley’s unique circumstances, it is overwhelmingly probable that any inheritance was placed into a restrictive trust, such as a discretionary or special needs trust.
Such a legal instrument would be managed by a trustee (perhaps his brother, Scott Hinckley, a former vice president at the family company) and would provide for his basic needs like housing and medical care.4
Crucially, it would prevent Hinckley from having direct control over the principal, protecting the assets while ensuring his managed care.
While he might be theoretically eligible for government support like Social Security or SSI, any income from such a trust would likely affect his eligibility for these need-based programs.48
Ultimately, Hinckley’s ability to earn is capped by a “social ceiling.” Legal frameworks prevent him from profiting from his crime, while powerful market forces prevent him from profiting from his art on any significant scale.
His income is therefore relegated to what he can generate through low-margin, direct-to-consumer online platforms—the modern-day equivalent of a subsistence-level existence.
Conclusion: Solving the Mystery – Net Worth as a Measure of Constraint
The investigation into John Hinckley Jr.’s net worth began with a simple question and a confounding lack of answers.
The mystery of the phantom fortune is solved not by finding a hidden number, but by understanding that for Hinckley, the entire concept of net worth is inverted.
His financial reality is not defined by assets and liabilities, but by a profound and multi-layered architecture of constraint.
His true financial position is best understood as an “un-balance sheet,” where the most significant entries are the things he lacks: control, access, and the ability to capitalize on his own identity.
Each phase of his life has added another layer of restriction:
- Legacy Constraint: The Hinckley family oil fortune, the presumed source of his wealth, was not a simple inheritance. It was systematically depleted by decades of staggering legal and medical costs required to navigate the consequences of his NGRI verdict. What remains is almost certainly locked in a restrictive trust that he cannot directly control, designed to manage his subsistence, not to empower him.
- Civil Constraint: The 1995 civil settlement with his victims was a decisive blow. It permanently stripped him of the commercial rights to his life story—his most infamous and potentially lucrative asset—and placed control of that narrative in the hands of a trust for their benefit.
- Statutory Constraint: “Son of Sam” laws, ironically amended in direct response to his own case, stand as a legal backstop. By defining him as a “convicted person” for the purpose of profiting from his crime, these statutes create a legal checkmate, ensuring that any financial gains from his notoriety would be subject to confiscation.
- Market Constraint: Finally, the court of public opinion and free market forces act as the ultimate gatekeeper. As the failed “Redemption Tour” demonstrated, the social and security risks associated with his name make any large-scale commercial endeavor, even one unrelated to his crime, financially untenable for any business partner.
John Hinckley Jr.’s net worth cannot be expressed as a dollar figure because his financial life is not a measure of accumulation, but of legally and socially enforced suppression.
He exists in a state of managed subsistence, his basic needs likely met by a carefully administered family trust, while his personal earning potential is capped at the lowest rungs of the online gig economy.
The scion of an oil fortune is, in all practical financial terms, a man whose greatest asset—his own infamous story—is the one thing he can never truly own or sell.
Works cited
- Introducing the Assassins: John W. Hinckley, Jr. | PlayMakers Repertory Company, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://playmakersrep.org/introducing-the-assassins-john-w-hinckley-jr/
- Hinckley came from wealthy oil family – UPI Archives, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.upi.com/Archives/1981/03/31/Hinckley-came-from-wealthy-oil-family/6507354862800/
- Biographies of Key Figures in the John Hinckley Trial – UMKC School of Law, accessed on July 22, 2025, http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/hinckley/hinckleykeyfigures.htm
- JOHN W. HINCKLEY, JR. – Famous Trials, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.famous-trials.com/johnhinckley/523-hinckley
- John Warnock Hinckley Sr., the father of the man… – UPI Archives, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.upi.com/Archives/1981/03/31/John-Warnock-Hinckley-Sr-the-father-of-the-man/1960354862800/
- John W. Hinckley, Jr. Biography – UMKC School of Law, accessed on July 22, 2025, http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/hinckley/hbio.htm
- John Hinckley Jr. – Wikipedia, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hinckley_Jr.
- John Hinckley Jr. – Reagan, Assassination & Facts – Biography, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.biography.com/crime/john-hinckley-jr
- The Trial of John W. Hinckley, Jr., accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.famous-trials.com/johnhinckley/537-hom
- Account of the Trial of John W. Hinckley, Jr. – UMKC School of Law, accessed on July 22, 2025, http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/hinckley/hinckleyaccount.html
- Trial of John W Hinckley, Jr – A Case Study in the Insanity Defense, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/trial-john-w-hinckley-jr-case-study-insanity-defense
- John Hinckley Jr., who attempted to assassinate Ronald Reagan, found not guilty | June 21, 1982 | HISTORY, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/june-21/hinckley-not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity
- Trial Account – UMKC School of Law, accessed on July 22, 2025, http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/hinckley/account.htm
- Hinckley’s Life after Commitment – Famous Trials, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.famous-trials.com/johnhinckley/532-lifeafter
- St. Elizabeths Hospital – Wikipedia, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Elizabeths_Hospital
- John Hinckley Jr., the Man Who Shot Reagan, Has a YouTube Channel Where He Sings His Own Songs – Washingtonian, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.washingtonian.com/2021/06/01/john-hinckley-jr-the-man-who-shot-reagan-has-a-youtube-channel-where-he-sings-his-own-songs/
- John Hinckley to leave DC mental hospital – AP Images Blog, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://apimagesblog.com/blog/2016/09/09/john-hinckley-to-leave-dc-mental-hospital
- John Hinckley Jr. Will Be Free in 2022: Here’s Why – FindLaw, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/legally-weird/john-hinckley-jr-will-be-free-in-2022-heres-why/
- How John Hinckley Lives Now – Washingtonian, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.washingtonian.com/2016/05/26/where-is-john-hinckley-now/
- Judge rejects Hinckley suit – UPI Archives, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.upi.com/Archives/1983/09/15/Judge-rejects-Hinckley-suit/5319432446400/
- Hinckley’s Life | TIME – Time Magazine, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://time.com/archive/6857273/hinckleys-life/
- The John Hinckley Trial: Key figures, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://famous-trials.com/johnhinckley/530-keyfigures
- Brady, 2 Others Will Benefit if Hinckley’s Story Is Told – SFGATE, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/brady-2-others-will-benefit-if-hinckley-s-story-3044276.php
- To Sue an Almost Assassin’s Therapist – Law Week Colorado, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.lawweekcolorado.com/article/to-sue-an-almost-assassins-therapist/
- Delahanty v. Hinckley – Descrybe.ai, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://descrybe.ai/case-details/c1362652
- Thomas Delahanty – Wikipedia, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Delahanty
- Case Citation Delahanty v. Hinckley, 564 A.2d 758 (D.C. 1989).docx – SlideShare, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/case-citation-delahanty-v-hinckley-564-a2d-758-dc-1989docx-253930923/253930923
- Delahanty v. Hinckley, 686 F. Supp. 920 (D.D.C. 1986) – Justia Law, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/686/920/1362652/
- HINCKLEY AGREES TO PAY VICTIMS – Time Magazine, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://time.com/archive/6923082/hinckley-agrees-to-pay-victims/
- The 1865: Peirce College Law Journal, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.peirce.edu/content/pdf/PeirceCollege-Law-Journal-Vol3-1_final.pdf
- The “Son of Sam” Trial: 1978 – Encyclopedia.com, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.encyclopedia.com/law/law-magazines/son-sam-trial-1978
- Son of Sam Resurrected: Did Greedy Criminals Unwittingly Give New Life to the â•œSon of Samâ•š Laws? – bepress Legal Repository, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://law.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=9291&context=expresso
- When It Pays to Be Insane: Three Unusual Legacies of Insanity, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://jaapl.org/content/jaapl/14/3/253.full.pdf
- John Hinckley, Jr. Trial (1982), accessed on July 22, 2025, https://famous-trials.com/johnhinckley
- not guilty by reason of insanity | Wex – Law.Cornell.Edu, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/not_guilty_by_reason_of_insanity
- John Hinckley Jr., who tried to assassinate President Reagan, is granted full release – OPB, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.opb.org/article/2022/06/15/john-hinckley-jr-who-tried-to-assassinate-president-reagan-granted-full-release/
- John Hinckley Jr. freed from court oversight after decades – MPR News, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.mprnews.org/story/2022/06/15/john-hinckley-jr-freed-from-court-oversight-after-decades
- John Hinckley – YouTube, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCck3J5KR3INUP1K-hrBe8iA
- John Hinckley – YouTube, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/@johnhinckley6860/videos
- A Strange Trip to John Hinckley’s Nonexistent Record Store – Washingtonian, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.washingtonian.com/2024/12/09/does-john-hinckleys-record-store-actually-exist/
- John Hinckley Jr. seeks to perform his folk music – YouTube, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8b_UMhXqlU
- John Hinckley – eBay, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.ebay.com/shop/john-hinckley?_nkw=john+hinckley
- John Hinckley Jr., aspiring songwriter who tried to kill Ronald Reagan, sells out Brooklyn show | The FADER, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.thefader.com/2022/04/13/john-hinckley-jr-aspiring-songwriter-who-tried-to-kill-ronald-reagan-sells-out-brooklyn-show
- Would You Book a Show by John Hinckley Jr.? Local Venues Debate. – Washingtonian, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.washingtonian.com/2022/04/19/would-you-book-a-show-by-john-hinckley-jr-local-venues-debate/
- John Hinckley Jr., Who Shot Ronald Reagan, Keeps Having Concerts Postponed – Complex, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.complex.com/music/a/cmplxtara-mahadevan/john-hinckley-jr-ronald-reagan-postponed-concerts
- Digital culture and entertainment insights daily: Who’s afraid of John Hinckley Jr.? – Dirt.fyi, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://dirt.fyi/article/2022/07/the-no-redemption-tour
- Jo Ann Hinckley, 95, Proud Homemaker Remembered For Her Kindness | Williamsburg Yorktown Daily, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://wydaily.com/obits/2021/08/02/jo-ann-hinckley-95-proud-homemaker-remembered-for-her-kindness/
- Benefits after Incarceration: What You Need To Know – SSA, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.ssa.gov/reentry/benefits.htm
- Supplemental Security Income During and After Incarceration – Congress.gov, accessed on July 22, 2025, https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12580
