- Court: United States Supreme Court
- Area(s) of Law: Administrative Law
- Date Filed: June 15, 2022
- Case #: 21-234
- Judge(s)/Court Below: BARRETT, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and THOMAS, ALITO, KAGAN, and KAVANAUGH, JJ., joined. SOTOMAYOR, J., filed a dissenting opinion. GORSUCH, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which BREYER, J., joined, and in which SOTOMAYOR, J., joined as to all but Part II–C.
- Full Text Opinion
George sought collateral relief from a denial of Veterans Affairs disability benefits based on his schizophrenia on the grounds of “clear and unmistakable error” under 38 U.S.C. § 7111. George argued that the decision was erroneously made by applying a later invalidated regulation that lowered the VA’s burden of proof to rebut the statutory presumption of sound condition. George petitioned the VA’s Board of Veteran’s Appeals for collateral relief, which the Board denied, and the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and Federal Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. On appeal, the Supreme Court affirmed. The Supreme Court reasoned that the use of the terms “clear” and “unmistakable” to modify “error,” suggest that there is a narrow form of error that will qualify, excluding forms of error that may be cognizable elsewhere. The Court found that the regulatory framework from which Congress adopted 38 U.S.C. § 7111 identified “clear and unmistakable error” as a narrow category of error that does not include changes in law or the interpretation thereof. The Court concluded that the VA’s application of a then-binding regulation, though later invalidated, does not constitute “clear and unmistakable error.” AFFIRMED.