Supreme Court won't take combat veterans' mental health appeal

WASHINGTON Mon Jan 7, 2013 11:46am EST

Related Topics

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Supreme Court on Monday refused to consider a challenge by veterans who said delays by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs in processing combat-related mental health claims contributed to suicides by veterans.

Without comment, the court let stand a May 2012 decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in San Francisco, which said it could not conclude that the VA broke the law by letting some veterans' healthcare claims stagnate for several years, and that only Congress or the president could direct changes.

That 10-1 decision reversed a 2-1 ruling by a panel of that court a year earlier that ordered the VA to ensure that suicidal veterans are seen immediately. The smaller panel cited the agency's "unchecked incompetence" in handling post-traumatic stress disorder and other mental health claims.

Non-profit groups including Veterans for Common Sense and Veterans United for Truth Inc had argued that because the agency took so long to process claims, it contributed to the despair that has led to the roughly 6,500 suicides among U.S. veterans each year.

In their appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, the non-profit groups had said that the 9th Circuit erred in finding no jurisdiction over challenges to the VA's "Kafkaesque" procedures and failure to provide medical benefits and resolve service-related benefits claims in a timely manner.

The U.S. Department of Justice, representing the VA, said the 9th Circuit decision was correct, and that the White House and Congress are in a better position than judges to address the VA's day-to-day operational issues.

The case is Veterans for Common Sense et al v. Shinseki et al, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 12-296.

(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in Washington; Editing by Eric Beech)

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (2)
MetalHead8 wrote:
thats sad

Jan 07, 2013 12:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TJCo wrote:
The high Court refused to hear Veterans who fought in battle for our country yet will spend time on a small group that attempts to change the meaning of marriage by cleverly linking most State’s definition of marriage to their claim that it denies them equal rights. Where is this country headed when it allows a minor group to cry lack of equal rights about an institution that has been defined for thousands of years and at the same time claims it is not allowed solve combat veterans health issues. When it wants to listen to a small minority misinterpret the meaning of equal rights and ignore veterans who need it’s help now, it must be time to ask the Courts to remember to use simple common sense and not be swayed by all who claim that they are being treated unfairly.

Jan 09, 2013 12:45am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.

Pictures