The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments in Johnson v. United States Congress, a case asking whether federal district courts may hear constitutional challenges to veterans' benefits laws. The dispute stems from Floyd Johnson, an Army veteran who was diagnosed with PTSD after being incarcerated in Florida. The Department of Veterans Affairs initially awarded him a 70 percent disability rating, but later reduced it to 10 percent under a law capping benefits for veterans imprisoned for more than 60 days.
Johnson sued Congress in federal district court, arguing that the cap violates the Constitution's bill of attainder clause and the Fifth Amendment. The district court dismissed his suit, and the 11th Circuit affirmed, ruling that the Veterans' Judicial Review Act (VJRA) creates an exclusive review scheme that channels benefits disputes through the VA, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and the Federal Circuit. The appeals court also rejected Johnson's attempt to substitute the VA as defendant, calling it futile.
Johnson argues that the VJRA uses language materially similar to the statute at issue in Johnson v. Robison, where the Supreme Court held that district courts retain jurisdiction over constitutional challenges. The government, represented by Solicitor General D. John Sauer, counters that the VJRA changed the legal landscape and that the Federal Circuit has exclusive jurisdiction over constitutional questions related to benefits decisions. The Court's ruling will resolve a split among the federal appeals courts over whether Robison remains good law after the VJRA's enactment.