Yesterday I posted the news about the Supreme Court agreeing to hear a case concerning whether it is constitutional to deny SSI benefits to disabled individuals who live in a U.S. territory. That was not the only announcement yesterday of a Social Security case that the Supreme Court would hear. The Court also agreed to hear Babcock v. Saul, which presents an issue of more limited importance, "Whether a civil service pension received for federal civilian employment as a “military technician (dual status)” is “a payment based wholly on service as a member of a uniformed service” for the purposes of the Social Security Act’s windfall elimination provision."
2 comments:
I predict the 6th/11th Circuit analysis will carry the day on this one as it is based upon a straightforward, strict textual interpretation of the language of the law (something the conservative-heavy Supreme Court really likes). The 8th Circuit analysis, on the other hand, was a pick-n-choose analysis that isn't going to fly with the conservatives justices.
Title is incorrect. Windfall Offset is a computation involving reducing RSDI benefits because SSI was paid the same months.
Windfall Elimination Provision is WEP, the law that allows for a different computation of PIA due to receipt of non-covered pensions. Eliminates the "unfair" weighting of the lowest bend point that gives more return on FICA taxes paid to lower income workers since the people who qualify for another pension are really not low income workers.
Post a Comment