Supreme Court ruling in Rudisill v. McDonough

Rudisill v. McDonough Update

Summary

On August 15, 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims ruled that certain veterans, those with multiple periods of qualifying service, could use both Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits and Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) benefits up to each individual program’s 36-month cap, subject only to the 48-month cap on total benefits. Rudisill v. Wilkie, No. 16-4134, at 1 (Vet. App. Aug. 15, 2019). On July 8, 2021, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. On February 3, 2022, the Court upheld the lower court’s ruling and ruled that the case should be reheard en banc before a panel of 12 judges. On December 15, 2022, the Court reversed the decision that had granted VA education benefits to Rudisill and other similarly situated veterans. On March 13, 2023, a Petition for writ of certiorari was filed to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). On June 26, 2023, SCOTUS granted the petition and agreed to hear the case.

SVA’s Involvement

Student Veterans of America (SVA) has been tracking this case’s developments, as it can impact many CURRENT and FUTURE student veterans. In August 2023, SVA submitted an Amicus Brief supporting the veteran before the Supreme Court proceedings later that year. The Amicus Brief can be found here.

SCOTUS Decision

On April 16, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled (7-2; with Justice Alito and Justice Thomas dissenting) that servicemembers who, through separate periods of service, accrue educational benefits under the Montgomery and Post-9/11 GI Bills may use either one, in any order, up to the 48-month aggregate-benefits cap per 38 U.S.C. § 3695(a). Additionally, the Court also states that, “[N]either §3322(d) nor §3327 restrict veterans with two separate entitlements who simply seek to use either one.” Rudisill v. McDonough, 601 U.S. ___ (2024). The Court notes that “Rudisill earned two separate entitlements to educational benefits due to the length of his military service. Based on his first period of service, he became ‘entitled to’ Montgomery benefits, as the statute clearly states. §3011(a). Equally clear is that his second and third periods of service ‘entitled’ him to Post-9/11 benefits. §3311(a).” Id.