SCOTUS' First Decision Of The Term Is A Unanimous Decision Against Disabled Veterans

[skews13]

After an unusual delay, the Supreme Court finally issued its first opinion of the term on Monday: a unanimous decision in Arellano v. McDonough siding against disabled veterans who seek compensation for disabilities related to their service. Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s opinion for the court denied these veterans (and their survivors) the ability to obtain benefits retroactively if they filed a late claim—even if the delay occurred because of their disability, or some other factor beyond their control.

It’s a painful blow to military members who were injured while serving their country, and a puzzling one: At oral arguments, the justices sounded divided, yet all three liberals lined up behind Barrett’s harsh opinion. Maybe they genuinely believed that Congress intended to impose an exceedingly stringent deadline on disabled veterans. Or perhaps the three-justice minority is so outnumbered that it has decided to pick its battles, and Arellano was not worth the fight.

MSN

www.msn.com

 

[pknopp]

We should do everything imaginable for those who were injured fighting our stupid worthless wars.

From the top we are showing what a lousy country we can be.

 

[Votto]

View attachment 750471
After an unusual delay, the Supreme Court finally issued its first opinion of the term on Monday: a unanimous decision in Arellano v. McDonough siding against disabled veterans who seek compensation for disabilities related to their service. Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s opinion for the court denied these veterans (and their survivors) the ability to obtain benefits retroactively if they filed a late claim—even if the delay occurred because of their disability, or some other factor beyond their control.

It’s a painful blow to military members who were injured while serving their country, and a puzzling one: At oral arguments, the justices sounded divided, yet all three liberals lined up behind Barrett’s harsh opinion. Maybe they genuinely believed that Congress intended to impose an exceedingly stringent deadline on disabled veterans. Or perhaps the three-justice minority is so outnumbered that it has decided to pick its battles, and Arellano was not worth the fight.

MSN

www.msn.com

It is not puzzling at all.

Soldiers who came home from Vietnam were denied health care as the government denied that their own agent orange caused so many health problems.

Soldiers coming home from the Gulf War had the Gulf War Syndrome. God only knows what Saddam unleashed on them, but again, many soldiers were denied treatment.

Then you had the Obama administration admit that veterans in Arizona were secretly being put on lists not to treat because they were too understaffed to care for them and too sick. Obama then fired some bureaucrat for it that had nothing to do with the scandal and swept it under the rug like government always does.

The list is really never ending. I know of someone personally treated like this. They did a surgery on them, one that only made him worse, and slowly pushed him out of the marines and denied him health care. He lived only 5 more years. He had seen a JAG lawyer who laughed and said, "Yea, this is an epidemic for veterans". Congressmen he wrote to never acknowledged his existence.

So for those clamoring for government run health care, which is what the VA is, keep note of this. Will they treat the average citizen any better?

No.

I apologize, this thread was meant to bash a conservative court and not really address the big picture.

Carry on.

 

[pknopp]

It is not puzzling at all.

Soldiers who came home from Vietnam were denied health care as the government denied that their own agent orange caused so many health problems.

Soldiers coming home from the Gulf War had the Gulf War Syndrome. God only knows what Saddam unleashed on them, but again, many soldiers were denied treatment.

Then you had the Obama administration admit that veterans in Arizona were secretly being put on lists not to treat because they were too understaffed to care for them and too sick. Obama then fired some bureaucrat for it that had nothing to do with the scandal and swept it under the rug like government always does.

The list is really never ending.

So for those clamoring for government run health care, which is what the VA is, keep note of this. Will they treat the average citizen any better?

No.

This isn't what the VA is. It's what the country is.

 

[1srelluc]

There need to be time limits placed to make claims after discharge. They went through the process to have that waved and were found wanting by the VA for whatever reason.

Congress made the rules they were denied by and it's not up to SCOTUS to change them. They interpret the law, they don't make it.

No matter what side you fall on with this one SCOTUS did the right thing, now Congress needs to step-up.

 

[pknopp]

There need to be time limits placed to make claims after discharge.

Why? Sometimes things may not show up for years.

 

[1srelluc]

Why? Sometimes things may not show up for years.

Then the VA will grant a exception if it's valid. It's not up to SCOTUS.....The only reason I figured they took it is to put it back in Congress's lap where it belongs.

 

[pknopp]

Then the VA will grant a exception if it's valid. It's not up to SCOTUS.....The only reason I figured they took it is to put it back in Congress's lap where it belongs.

Even if you argue that the court simply ruled on a technical decision it still doesn't change what I said about the country overall.

 

[1srelluc]

Even if you argue that the court simply ruled on a technical decision it still doesn't change what I said about the country overall.

The topic was the SCOTUS decision, no shits given about what you think of the country.

 

[pknopp]

The topic was the SCOTUS decision, no shits given about what you think of the country.

The ruling is all related. If we insist on taking care of veterans there is never a reason for the court to address something like this.

 

[1srelluc]

The ruling is all related. If we insist on taking care of veterans there is never a reason for the court to address something like this.

They are taken care of, few vets I know complain of the care they get from the VA but there is always one jackwagon in every community.

I figure you are about like this guy in my AO that tooled around town with that sit on his car till it fell off and caused a wreck.....The fucker is in better health than many of his peers in my AO who served in Vietnam.

He sets-up at the local flea market and I won't even stop at his table, I got tired of listening to his shit years ago.

 

[pknopp]

They are taken care of, few vets I know complain of the care they get from the VA

It's not just about the vet's "you know".

 

[1srelluc]

It's not just about the vet's "you know".

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I apologize, this thread was meant to bash a conservative court and not really address the big picture.

Carry on.

Do you think the court's decision will make things better or worse for the Vets relying on the VA?