The Social Security Administration is publishing a new Ruling concerning the effects of the Supreme Court opinion in Lucia v. SEC. I haven’t had time to digest the Ruling but it sounds like there’s a lot of remands coming for those who filed timely objections.
7 comments:
Maybe there will be a lot of remands.
"The Appeals Council will either remand the case to a different ALJ; issue a new,
independent decision; or, as appropriate, issue an order dismissing the request for a
hearing."
Sounds to me like the Appeals Council is going to be re-adjudicating a bunch of claims not necessarily remanding. It mentions requesting a new hearing before to Appeals Council to present oral argument.
To the rep community, would you rather have a remand hearing before another ALJ or have the AC issue a new decision?
I'd prefer a new hearing before an ALJ. I appreciate the AC affording an opportunity to present oral argument, but I'm assuming that this will require travel to Virginia. Plus, only 10 days' notice versus 75 for ALJ hearing. Further, if there is a new ALJ hearing, the claimant can present updated medical through the date of the new hearing. Will the AC be allowing new medical? I don't think that the AC issuing independent decisions is in anyone's best interest. It takes months to get a simple two-sentence denial from the AC as it is.
This raises more issues than it resolves. Off the top of my head, I can think of three:
1. What about claims after 3/16/18? Some claimants are still filing Lucia objections.
2. In light of Sims and the fact that Agency policy was to not address any such challenges, why is there any requirement that an objection be made timely?
3. Will the new AAJ decisions run afoul of the Constitution or the Social Security Act? Are AAJs constitutionally or statutorily empowered to issue such decisions?
"or, as appropriate, issue an order dismissing the request for a
hearing."
Seems like the way they will handle it.
This has all the hallmarks of a Terrie Gruber/Patrick Neagle end-run against ALJ authority -- turning the decision-making power away from ALJs, and giving it one level down to "AAJs" -- who are really AJs, or hearing examiners, i.e. not independent decision-makers. AJs are more under agency control than ALJs. This SSR is exactly the kind of thing Congress tried to prevent 3-4 years ago, when they slapped down a previous Agency proposal to give the AAJs authority to hear and decide cases in lieu of ALJs.
The old AALJ under Marilyn Zahm would have opposed this SSR ferociously, but the new AALJ is pro-management and is probably just going to smile and nod benignly.
Time for the existing ALJ core to pack up their desks!!
Post a Comment