About Us
Who Decides Facial Constitutional Challenges to Veterans’ Benefits Statutes?
The issue involves how easy or how difficult it is for veterans to challenge a law’s validity.
The Supreme Court will decide whether a federal statute meant to increase veterans’ access to judicial review bars veterans from bringing facial constitutional challenges to statutes affecting their benefits in district court. This is significant for older adults, given that about 70% of military veterans are over 50 years of age.
Petition: Johnson v. United States Congress, No. 25-735 (Apr. 6, 2026)
Decision Below: Johnson v. United States Congress, 151 F.4th 1287 (11th Cir. 2025), cert. granted, 224 L. Ed. 2d. 380 (2026)
Issue: Whether the Veterans’ Judicial Review Act stripped district courts of the jurisdiction to hear challenges to the constitutionality of acts of Congress affecting veterans’ benefits.
Since its creation in 1930, the Veterans Administration (VA) has been responsible for administering programs and benefits—including disability compensation, pensions, education assistance, and life insurance—for military veterans. See Exec. Order No. 5398 (July 21, 1930). Veterans who have service-related disabilities are eligible to receive tax-free disability compensation regardless of their income, ability to work, or ability to claim benefits through other government programs. See 38 U.S.C. §§ 1176-2414.
For much of its history, the VA operated free from judicial oversight. Until 1988, veterans generally had no avenue for judicial review when benefits were denied. See Brown v. Gardner, 513 U.S. 115, 122 (1994) (stating “Congress established no judicial review for VA decisions until 1988”). Although the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA) was created in 1933 to review benefits determinations, Exec. Order No. 6230 (July 28, 1933), its decisions were final and insulated from judicial review. See 38 U.S.C. § 7104.
In 1974, the Supreme Court in Johnson v. Robison considered whether a veteran could bring a constitutional challenge to the Veterans’ Readjustment Benefits Act of 1966, despite a provision in that statute barring judicial review of benefits decisions. 415 U.S. 361, 366 (1974). The Court held that while district courts could not review administrative benefits determinations, they retained jurisdiction over constitutional challenges to statutes affecting veterans’ benefits. Id. at 367. The Court reasoned that a contrary interpretation would effectively foreclose judicial review of constitutional claims and thus violate the Fifth Amendment. Id. at 366.
A little over a decade later, Congress enacted the Veterans’ Judicial Review Act (VJRA) in 1988. Pub. L. No. 100–687, 102 Stat. 4105 (1988) (codified as amended in scattered sections of Title 38). The VJRA created the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) to review BVA decisions and authorized further review by the Federal Circuit. Id. at § 223(c). For the first time, veterans had a statutory path to judicial review of benefit determinations.
The case before the Supreme Court, Johnson v. United States Congress, concerns VJRA § 511(a), which prohibits judicial review “by any court” of decisions of the Secretary affecting veteran’s benefits. 38 U.S.C. § 511(a). In this case, an army veteran filed a civil lawsuit in federal district court, bringing a facial constitutional challenge to a statute that substantially limited his eligibility for disability benefits. Johnson v. United States Cong., 151 F.4th 1287, 1289 (11th Cir. 2025), cert. granted, 224 L. Ed. 2d 380 (2026).
The question is whether the VJRA eliminated the district court’s jurisdiction to hear constitutional challenges to veteran-benefits statutes that Robison had previously permitted. Although § 511(a) uses language like the judicial-review provision considered in Robison, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that the VJRA’s creation of a specialized review scheme displaced district courts’ jurisdiction over such constitutional challenges. Id. at 1293. According to the court, these challenges must proceed through the veterans-benefits process and ultimately be reviewed by the CAVC and Federal Circuit rather than by federal district courts. Id. at 1292. Oral argument is scheduled for October 5.
What's at Stake
The Supreme Court’s decision will determine whether veterans may bring facial constitutional challenges to statutes governing veterans’ benefits directly in federal district courts or whether they must navigate the VA’s lengthy administrative process first. See Board of Veterans’ Appeals, More Board Personnel Address Pending AMA Appeals and Wait Times, VA (June 22, 2026). Greater access to justice is especially important for older veterans who depend on VA programs and benefits, such as disability compensation, pensions, caregiver support, and health-related benefits, to meet basic needs.
Dean Graybill, DGraybill@aarp.org
2026 Supreme Court Preview
The Supreme Court often hears cases affecting the lives of people over 50. Read our review of key cases coming before the Court this year and likely to come in the future.
2026 Supreme Court Preview
The Supreme Court often hears cases affecting the lives of people over 50. Read our review of key cases coming before the Court this year and likely to come in the future.