The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that courts do not have to re-examine the VA’s use of the “benefit-of-the-doubt” rule in disability claims, which favors veterans when evidence is evenly balanced.
Veterans Joshua Bufkin and Norman Thornton had their claims denied despite close evidence. The Court said appeals courts should only check for clear errors in VA decisions, not reweigh evidence.
Justice Thomas wrote the majority opinion, emphasizing deference to VA expertise. Justices Jackson and Gorsuch dissented, arguing the ruling weakens veterans’ protections.
The decision makes it harder for veterans to overturn VA denials unless clear mistakes are shown. The dissent stresses protecting veterans’ rights through the benefit-of-the-doubt rule, historically supporting them.
Veterans and advocacy groups worry the ruling may reduce approvals and increase the need for strong legal advocacy, prompting calls for legislative reforms and improved VA procedures.
This case highlights the tension between respecting agency expertise and ensuring fair outcomes for veterans, signaling ongoing debates in administrative law and veterans’ rights.