U.S. v. Vaello-Madero Relisted

     United States v. Vaello-Madero, the case on the constitutionality of denying SSI to U.S. citizens who live in Puerto Rico, has been relisted by the Supreme Court, meaning that the Court will consider again on Friday whether to schedule the case for oral arguments. My understanding is that relisting like this is common in cases that the Court eventually agrees to hear. However, it would also be possible for the Court to summarily reverse the decision below without an oral argument. 

     If the Court does decide to hear the case, there is the issue of when it gets heard. The Court's argument calendar for this term is nearly full. If it gets heard in this term, we get an opinion by early July at the latest. The Court's new term always begins on the first Monday in October so if it gets pushed into the next term we're not likely to get an opinion before early 2022.

"Bold Vision"?

      From Policy Pillars and Priorities: A Bold Vision for a Legislative Pathway Toward Health and Economic Equity issued this month by Richard Neal, the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee:

... The framework we present here is Ways and Means Committee Democrats’ plan to make our nation a more just and equitable place. ...

Congress must do more to help American families, especially minority families, have a secure and dignified retirement. Social Security provides the foundation of retirement security, and its benefits must be strengthened and improved, particularly for low-wage workers. Social Security disability benefits must be protected against harmful attacks.  ...

Policy Approaches 

•Strengthen and improve Social Security benefits, particularly for low-wage workers 

•Protect Social Security disability benefits from harmful regulations and other attacks designed to reduce access to benefits ...

     As far as Social Security goes, that's all there is in this document. Note that there's no legislative action even suggested as far as Social Security disability benefits go and only the vaguest suggestion that something unspecified might be done more generally to "strengthen and improve Social Security benefits." SSI isn't even mentioned.

     Perhaps I shouldn't be critical. Perhaps this is meant to be something similar to the vapid "mission statements" that many corporations and organizations pointlessly struggle to put out but, honestly, I don't see even a hint of boldness in this document, at least as far as Social Security is concerned.

Saul Mum As Outside Groups Plan Press Conference

     From a press release issued by Social Security Works:

This Tuesday, Jan. 12th at 2pm ET, unions representing Social Security Administration (SSA) employees and advocates representing Social Security beneficiaries will hold a virtual press conference calling on Joe Biden to clean house by removing all of Donald Trump’s political appointees from SSA on day one of his presidency. The press conference will air live on the Social Security Works Facebook page. ...

Who:

• Ralph de Juliis, President of AFGE Council 220
• The Honorable Melissa McIntosh, President of the Association of Administrative Law Judges
• Matthew Biggs, Secretary-Treasurer of the International Federation of Professional & Technical Engineers
• Alex Lawson, Executive Director of Social Security Works ...

      It seems to me that if I were Andrew Saul and I were planning to hang around as Commissioner, I would have put out a press release sometime in the last two months congratulating Joe Biden and expressing an intention to work with the Biden Administration. If I weren't planning on hanging around, I think I would have already put out a press release saying that I was resigning on a specific date. Neither has happened. I don't know what the lack of any press release means. Maybe somebody should ask Saul what it means, like a reporter seeking a comment on this press conference.

The Numbers Are In

      The Social Security Administration has updated its statistics through the end of 2020 on the number of disability claims filed and adjudicated. (This website may be down at the moment. Social Security's websites seem to be having some problem this morning. I can't get up any of them including the main website.)

     The number of disability claims for which adjudication began went from 1,309,863 in 2019 to 1,226,2236 in 2020, a decline of 6.4%. The number of disability claims entering adjudication has now declined by 36% from its peak in 2010. The number of claims approved went down by 38% over the same time frame.

     By the way, do you remember what happened in the November 2010 election? Republicans gained control of the House of Representatives. They commenced relentless attacks on Social Security disability claimants and beneficiaries.  That wasn't the only thing causing the decline but I'm pretty sure it was a factor.

Waiting Period Eliminated For Those With ALS

      In the midst of everything else I missed that the Congress passed and the President signed a bill that eliminates the five month waiting period for Disability Insurance Benefits for those found disabled due to Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS), often referred to as Lou Gehrig’s Disease. Can somebody explain to me why those with ALS receive this break but not people suffering from terminal cancer? I’ve had the experience of explaining to my sister that there was no point in her applying for Social Security disability benefits because she wouldn’t live long enough to collect them so, yes, this feels personal to me.

Serious Question

      When was the last time anyone at Social Security saw Andrew Saul?

Supreme Court To Again Consider Hearing Puerto Rico SSI Case

     The Supreme Court has "relisted" U.S. v. Vaello-Madero, the case presenting the issue of the constitutionality of denying SSI to U.S. citizens who reside in Puerto Rico and most other U.S. territories. This means that the Court will once again consider whether to agree to hear the case. John Elwood, writing for SCOTUSblog, says that the Court is likely to agree to hear the case.

     This case is a big freaking deal to Social Security world. If the Court finds that it's unconstitutional to deny SSI to Puerto Rico residents, there will be an avalanche of new claims. All parts of the Social Security Administration will be affected. I expect that it will be the biggest logistical challenge for the agency since the creation of SSI in the 1970s.

     It's not clear what position that the new Administration will take on this case. The nomination of Merrick Garland to be Attorney General suggests that the Biden Administration will follow traditional policies which include defending the constitutionality of any statue but there's not been an announcement of a Solicitor General nomination. It's the Solicitor General who actually handles Supreme Court cases for the federal government. The Trump Administration abandoned traditional policies and routinely refused to defend statutes it disagreed with. If the Biden Administration follows suit, it could settle this case as well as any class actions on the issue. Yes, even cases scheduled for oral argument at the Supreme Court can be settled.

     Update: The Supreme Court took no action on the Vaello-Madero case today.

More Eric Conn Litigation

      From the Lexington Herald-Leader:

A former client of disbarred attorney Eric C. Conn has sued to try to overturn hundreds of small-claims lawsuit judgments that Conn pursued against people he represented in Eastern Kentucky.

The judgments have likely caused problems for Conn’s former clients that include damage to their credit scores, losing out on loans and being passed over for jobs, the lawsuit claims. ...

The man who sued Conn, James K. Gillman, is serving a two-year jail sentence and fears the judgment Conn obtained against him will jeopardize his chance of being released on parole, said his attorney, Ned Pillersdorf. ...

     I assume these judgments were for the costs that Conn incurred in representing his clients, both the costs of obtaining existing medical records and the costs of the medical exams done at Conn's office that became part of Conn's criminal problems. I'm surprised he sued over these costs. I doubt that it was cost effective but a lot of what Conn did made no sense. Some people would rather earn a dishonest nickel than an honest dollar.

Read more here: https://www.kentucky.com/news/state/kentucky/article248288575.html?utm_source=BenchmarkEmail&utm_campaign=Today%27s_Daily_Clips_%7c_January_6_2021&utm_medium=email#storylink=cpy

Read more here: https://www.kentucky.com/news/state/kentucky/article248288575.html?utm_source=BenchmarkEmail&utm_campaign=Today%27s_Daily_Clips_%7c_January_6_2021&utm_medium=email#storylink=cpy