Posted on 05/08/2024 12:13:51 AM PDT by RandFan
The Supreme Court recently decided on a case you might not have heard about. Its underreported landmark ruling about the GI Bill could have a massive positive effect on America’s veterans, our communities and our nation for years to come.
Earlier this month, the highest court in the land issued a 7-2 ruling that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) improperly calculated GI Bill benefits for retired Army Captain James Rudisill, who now works in federal law enforcement.
Like so many others before him, Rudisill had separated from the military and wanted to use the educational benefits that we all earn while serving our country. However, Rudisill earned his benefits under two different versions of the GI Bill — the one applied to those who served before the 9/11 attacks, and the one that applied to those afterward.
Rudsill had served both before and after that awful day in our history, yet the VA told him that he gave up his benefits under the old version when he chose to use the ones he accrued under the post-9/11 version. This ruined his plans to go to Yale Divinity School and pursue a job as a military chaplain.
Rather than capitulate to the VA, he sued it, fighting all the way to the Supreme Court, which ruled in his favor. This ruling is life-changing news for many veterans who are looking to expand their career opportunities after the military. It’s great news for me personally, because I was one of those veterans who will now become eligible for additional GI Bill benefits....
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
This is good news ... which is in short supply these days.
I can just guess which two female running dog commies ruled against this.
Nope. Thomas & Alito ruled against the bill.
Good news for Veterans is always welcome. Personally, I’m too old to get much help from this but those that served/serving are keeping this old man safe. So good for all of them. They earned it. On your feet or on your knees. We made our choice. God bless all those that serve. IMO
Good news for our vets.
They have reconciled those two bills. I have not read about it anywhere else but it’s pretty big isn’t it! Will affect 1.7 million+ people
I used my GI Bill from service 1968-76 and it paid for tuition and some money for books all the way through my time at the North Avenue Trade School. Without it, I’d never have been ablet to graduate in 1980.
I would have guessed that as soon as I saw the headline. When a leftist rag like “The Hill” calls a 7-2 Supreme Court ruling good news, I assume Thomas and Alito are the two dissenters.
“Thomas & Alito ruled against the bill.”
Obviously, there are problems within the bill if those two are against it. On its face, though, it seems fair, i.e., “grandfathered in” based on rules/law at the time of hiring.
Wonderful. Now they should declare for concurrent service connected disability pay.
Without having to put up with VA math on percentages. If standard arithmetic were used, I’d be getting another $1K/mo.
I think it was around 76 that they herded us all into the Base Theater to push the “new and improved” GI Bill which required folks to pay into it - I opted to stay under the old one and got my degree with no problems - while others struggled....
You must be talking about disability, where 60, 70 and 10 = 90.
I knew someone would know what I was talking about!
USAF (Ret) here.
I’m so tired of seeing military benefits being withheld from our veterans. It’s happening to me now. I’m glad this ruling come down.
Thus, to summarize: Per §3322, servicemembers who are eligible for educational benefits under either the Montgomery GI Bill or the Post-9/11 GI Bill—from a period of service that could qualify for either program—can opt to credit that service toward one educational benefits program or the other," Jackson wrote in her opinion.
However, in his dissenting opinion, Thomas wrote, "The Court holds that, although Rudisill must make some election to switch from his Montgomery to Post-9/11 benefits, the statute's corresponding limits do not apply because it would reduce the amount of available benefits. In my view, the Court ignores the statutory mechanism that Congress created in favor of an interpretation that reaches a desired outcome. I respectfully dissent."
That's something I haven't heard in a while.
You have to be from Georgia and familiar with it I guess. :0)
It harkens back to the days of the big steam engine they have displayed on the old part of the campus.
Well that’s interesting. I wonder what’s wrong with the bill?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.