登录查看更多内容

GI Bill U.S. Supreme Court Ruling in Rudisill v. McDonough Case

Vanessa Lech

?? I'm less active on LinkedIn. See "Featured" section of profile for why. Profile, posted articles, past posts, recommendations will remain. Visit Vanessa Lech .com & Woman Military Veteran .com for more. Thanks!

发布日期: 2024年4月18日

Are you aware of the recent Supreme Court decision about Military GI Bill Education benefits?

The Supreme Court has issued a landmark ruling in the Rudasil v. McDonough case, a pivotal decision that directly impacts GI Bill Military Educational Benefits.

James Rudisill is a Military Veteran who was a plaintiff in the lawsuit against The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The current VA Secretary is Denis McDonough, and he was named as a defendant. This is typical in my experience. I, too, was a plaintiff in a legal action against the VA.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote the majority opinion in favor of the plaintiff, James Rudisill. Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito ruled against the Military Community with their dissenting votes.

The ruling will have implications for how these benefits are administered in the future. Most of the judges (7 out of 9) ruled in favor of the plaintiff, a Military Veteran. Justice Jackson wrote the majority opinion, which states that eligible Military Veterans are potentially entitled to benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill and the Post 9/11 GI Bill. However, the total duration of these benefits is?not?to exceed 48 months, as outlined in federal law.?

The case centered around James Rudisill, an Army Veteran who sued after being denied full use of both the Montgomery and Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits he had earned through two separate periods of active duty military service.?

An untold number of Military Veterans paid money into the Montgomery GI Bill. I was one of those Military Veterans. I was told I would receive the Montgomery GI Bill afterward. Instead, the Post-9/11 GI Bill was rolled out shortly after I had paid my money, and no mention of a refund of my money was ever provided. Essentially, the U.S. government stole my money.?

In the groundbreaking majority opinion, Justice Jackson ruled that Military Veterans like Rudisill who accrue eligibility for both GI Bill programs can use both, overturning previous interpretations. This decision is estimated to impact approximately 1.7 million Military Veterans eligibility for increased education benefits, offering a potentially brighter future for these individuals.

Almost half of Military Veterans do not utilize their earned educational benefits. Educational benefits must be flexible for those who would prefer to use the funds to start and operate their own businesses or have the discretion to do with the funds as they choose.?

When I was on active duty in the U.S. military, I was paid so little that I was looking for a second job. Cuts to retirement, education, and other benefits showcase the financial exploitation and depravity of our politicians' priorities. These politicians need to learn how to do their own bidding, fighting and dying for the wars they choose to create.

However, The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Office of General Counsel [their lawyers] argued against Military Veterans as usual. The VA lawyers made various statements against the Military Community, such as saying there are not any other Military Veteran cases like this one, insinuating that no other Military Veterans are eligible for these benefits, and making other bazaar statements that no more than "30,000" Military Veterans would be eligible. VA lawyers' behavior reveals VA's continued apathy and disdain towards the Military Community.?

This is the same type of 'nonsensical' [I'm borrowing Justice Jackson's word] behavior that I endured for years from VA's attorneys after inadvertently becoming a VA whistleblower. A whistleblower is an individual for example, who exposes illegal activities within an organization. In my unfortunate employment at Veterans Health Administration, I uncovered and reported such activities. Check out 'Veterans Affairs Whistleblower Retaliation' book to learn more.?

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs is self-serving and fighting against Military Veterans. Politicians have a history of engaging in "bait and switch" tactics with earned Military Veteran benefits through actions like cutting retirement, educational, and other benefits. This information should be required disclosure in ALL recruiting commercials, advertisements, and recruiting pitches.?

However, the ruling still represents a significant symbolic victory for Military Veterans' rights. Politicians and state attorney generals from across the political spectrum filed legal statements with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of the Military Veteran plaintiff, recognizing the importance of this issue.

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs has been left in charge of dispensing benefits they do?not?want to provide, creating a cloud of uncertainty about the long-term impact of this decision.

???Disclaimer:

This article is for general information and/or educational purposes only. ?? No legal or professional advice here. ?? No clinical relationship established.

?? Disclosure:

In creating this content, I utilized several tools, including: