Smith v. Berryhill Oral Argument Summary

     SCOTUSblog has posted a detailed summary of yesterday's Supreme Court oral argument in Smith v. Berryhill, a case concerning whether judicial review is available for Appeals Council dismissals. There's a lot of attention to major Supreme Court cases, as well there should be, but the Supreme Court's docket contains plenty of straightforward cases like this one where the political leanings of justices have little or no effect on the outcome.

OHO Processing Time Report

     This is a processing time report for Social Security's Office of Hearings Operations (OHO) obtained from the agency by the National Organization of Social Security Claimants Representatives (NOSSCR) and published in their newsletter, which isn't available online to non-members.

Click on image to view full size

Headcount Ticks Up

     The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has posted updated figures for the number of employees at the Social Security Administration:

• September 2018 62,519
• June 2018 60,898
• December 2017 62,777
• September 2017 62,297
• June 2017 61,592
• March 2017 62,183
• December 2016 63,364
• December 2015 65,518
• December 2014 65,430
• December 2013 61,957
• December 2012 64,538
• September 2011 67,136
• December 2010 70,270
• December 2009 67,486
• December 2008 63,733
• September 2008 63,990

Proposed Regs On CDRs Moving Forward

     The Social Security Administration has asked the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to approve publication of proposed regulations in the Federal Register on continuing disability reviews. Below is all that is publicly known about this proposal:

We propose to revise our rules regarding when and how often we conduct continuing disability reviews (CDR). The proposed regulations would add a new category to our existing medical diary categories that we use to schedule CDRs and would revise the criteria we follow to place a case in each of the categories. They would also change how often we perform a CDR for claims with the medical diary category for permanent impairments. These revised regulations would ensure that we continue to identify medical improvement at its earliest point and remain up to date with current research.

     If OMB approves this, it will be published in full and the public can comment on it. Social Security is supposed to consider the comments before publishing a final rule. We’re already getting a little late in the term of office to which Donald Trump has been elected for this to all be completed. but it can happen.

Senators Pressure Trump Administration On Social Media Monitoring

     From a press release:

Today, U.S. Sens. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) and Bob Casey (D-PA) pressured the Trump Administration to provide answers to the American public following a report from the New York Times this week that the White House is working with the Social Security Administration (SSA) on a proposal to monitor social media accounts of Americans who claim disability benefits. The Senators’ letter raises several questions about the proposal related to the privacy of American citizens, the already limited resources available to SSA workers, the use of artificial intelligence, and plans to increase the scope of the social media monitoring program.

This Is Terrible

     From WFLA:

Mamie Walker is 84-years-old, has never attended college and depends on her monthly social security check of $1,498 to survive. 

But for the past two months, the government has sent Mamie nothing, except a letter claiming she owes them $224,414.50. 

A letter from the Treasury Department 

claims she has been referred to them for "collection action."  

The letter explains up to 15 percent of each of her checks will be withheld to pay the debt. That was shocking enough, but no check came at all in February or March. She received another letter stating she won't receive another check until Sept. 2031.

"I'll probably be dead by then," Walker said. "I'm so scared. I don't sleep at night because I'm so scared next week ... my lights are going to be off." 

Mamie says she not only never went to college, but she never learned to read or write because she had to go to work as a child to help support her family as a "field hand." ...

     I can guess that she guaranteeded a student loan for a relative. If not, this is one hell of a mistake. If it is a student loan for a relative, this points out the horrors of the current system. It’s possible for her to get out from under this crushing burden by declaring bankruptcy but it’s not easy.

No, I Don’t Think That SSA Can Solve Its Lucia Problem By Having The Appeals Council Deny All The People Who Filed Lucia Objections

      I’ve already heard some colleagues say that the new Social Security Ruling giving the agency’s response to the Supreme Court opinion in Lucia v. SEC means that the agency thinks it can solve its Lucia problem by having the Appeals Council itself issue de novo decisions in the cases. There are a couple of problems with this. First, the Appeals Council isn’t set up to issue thousands of de novo decisions. Second, and more important, the Social Security Act says that claimants are entitled to hearings. If you’re agreeing that the hearing that was held was constitutionally invalid, how do you get around giving the claimant a new hearing? There’s a lot of wishful thinking at Social Security. I hope they’re not so far gone that they think they can get away with that. I think the language that some are pointing to about the Appeals Council issuing decisions is only intended to allow the Appeals Council to issue fully favorable decisions in a few cases.

     I have to mention that after Lucia came down I told everyone who would listen that we should be filing Lucia objections in every case pending at the Appeals Council.

New Lucia Ruling

 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.