The Supreme Court has agreed to hear an appeal in Johnson v. the U.S. Congress. The case involves plaintiff Floyd D. Johnson, an Army veteran with PTSD appealing a mandated reduction in his VA disability benefits because of his status as a prisoner. His case is expected to determine the proper court jurisdiction for the benefits challenge to be argued. (Stars and Stripes)
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case of an incarcerated Army veteran with post-traumatic stress disorder whose disability benefits were significantly reduced because of his lengthy prison term.
The Department of Veterans Affairs decreased Floyd D. Johnson’s disability rating from 80% to 10% because of a federal law that imposes a benefits restriction on felons serving prison terms of more than 60 days.
But the case before the high court, which is expected to be heard during its 2026-2027 term, is not over whether Johnson can keep his full benefits while in prison. It will focus on where his legal appeal of the VA benefits decision can be heard, according to the complaint.
Johnson, who was honorably discharged in 1985 after three years in the military, is asking the Supreme Court to decide whether constitutional challenges to VA benefit laws can be heard in district court.
“Veterans deserve, at barest minimum, to know where they can get an adjudication of their constitutional challenges to congressional statutes limiting their benefits. This Court’s intervention is necessary to answer that question,” Johnson’s attorneys said in their petition to the Supreme Court.
The Veterans’ Judicial Review Act, enacted by Congress, sends challenges to benefit decisions at the regional level to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals and the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for higher review.
Johnson filed an initial complaint to U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, which dismissed the complaint.
He turned to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, which dismissed his case for lack of jurisdiction.
“The [Supreme] Court will determine whether the 1988 Veterans’ Judicial Review Act stripped federal district courts of jurisdiction to hear constitutional challenges to veterans’ benefits statutes, or if veterans are exclusively required to channel claims through the specialized U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims,” the National Association of Attorneys General said.
Johnson, who is serving 40 years in prison in Florida for a string of state felony convictions, is represented by Stanford Law School’s Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, as well as attorneys from Bondurant Mixson & Elmore, of Atlanta, Ga.
“The Eleventh Circuit directly passed upon the question of whether district courts have jurisdiction over constitutional challenges to veterans’ benefits statutes,” his attorneys said in court documents.
His attorneys indicated that Johnson plans to challenge the VA’s disability benefits restriction after the court jurisdiction question is resolved.
Johnson had claimed that his constitutional rights were violated under the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause, when the VA lowered his benefits.
Congress has placed limits on VA benefits for incarcerated felons, because the government covers basic living and medical expenses during imprisonment, according to the Veterans Benefits Administration.
Johnson has argued that the mandated decrease amounted to legislative punishment without trial.
“The constitutionality of a veteran’s benefits statute is no small matter. Over 9 million Americans — half of all veterans — used at least one VA benefit or service in [fiscal] 2023,” his attorneys said.
