Straw: “resided at Camp Lejeune”

Straw v. Wilkie, Case Number 18-7129, decided January June 26, 2020 involves the definition of “resided at Camp Lejeune” in order to qualify for healthcare benefits for family members of veterans.

38 USC 1710 provides that veteran’s who served at Camp Lejeune for 30 days from August 1, 1953 to December 31, 1987 are eligible for hospital care and medical services for specified illnesses and conditions.  Another provisions extends these benefits to service member family members “who resided at Camp Lejeune… for not fewer than 30 days… or were in utero during such period.” 

The appellant is the son of a veteran who served at Camp Lejeune.  In fact, the Appellant was born at the base hospital and stayed there from March 19-22 when he was discharged.  He then moved to a home off base.  Before the VA, there was argument that he was taken to the VA both in utero and after birth many times and should thus qualify.

The Court looked at the plain meaning of the statute as foreclosing his argument.  It then stated: 

Generously construing these contentions, the Court understands the appellant to be arguing that Congress's line drawing offends the equal protection component of the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. See Bowers v. Shinseki, 26 Vet.App. 201, 208 n.11 (2013). Despite being able to discern such an argument from his briefs, however, we conclude that Mr. Straw hasn't demonstrated an equal protection violation. 

Id. at *6-7. 

The Court also explained: 

Mr. Straw's allegations of unfairness and arbitrariness are no doubt sincere, but they fail to show an equal protection violation under the demanding standard applicable here. Congress has the power "to legislate on the basis of such factual assumptions" as are involved under the Act, and general rules are "essential" if legislation like this "is to be administered with a modicum of efficiency, even though such rules inevitably produce seemingly arbitrary consequences in some individual cases."

Id. at *8.

This is a simple case of statutory interpretation.  It might lead to a hard result, but that ultimately must be taken up with Congress.

Decision by Judge Toth and joined in by Judges Greenberg and Falvey. 

To know more about whether Thomas Andrews can help you, please visit my website.