Two veterans who had their disability applications rejected argued that a federal court applied the wrong standard when it adjudicated their claims.

Yet as Stars and Stripes reported, the Supreme Court has rejected those assertions, concluding that both cases were properly handled. 

Ruling concerns two military veterans with PTSD-related disability claims

The Supreme Court noted in its syllabus that the plaintiffs "are veterans who applied for service-connected post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) disability benefits and were dissatisfied with the VA’s resolution of their claims."

One of them was Joshua Bufkin, a former airman who served between 2005 and 2006. The other was Norman Thornton, a Gulf War veteran who was in the Army from 1988 to 1991.

Bufkin received a "nonprejudicial hardship discharge" owing to the fact that his wife threatened to commit suicide if he did not leave the Air Force.

He subsequently filed a disability claim for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) but was denied after his doctors could not agree on a diagnosis.

Meanwhile, Thornton had received a 50% disability rating and unsuccessfully sought to have it upgraded, maintaining that his PTSD interfered with his ability to work.

Denials may be appealed to veterans court

The Supreme Court observed that Congress has tasked the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) with administering benefit claims.

Decisions can be appealed to the Board of Veterans' Appeals and then the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, or veterans court.

The Supreme Court has rejected an argument by two veterans that the Department of Veterans Affairs had a duty to grant their claims for post-traumatic stress disorder when the evidence showed the decision to be a close call. https://t.co/KSagKySzG0

— Stars and Stripes (@starsandstripes) March 9, 2025

It has the power to set aside those rulings which are "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law."

Justices say veterans court need only reverse in cases of "clear error"

Lawyers for Bufkin and Thornton argued that the veterans court should have applied the benefit-of-the-doubt standard when reviewing cases where there is conflicting evidence.

Yet in a seven to two ruling released last week, America's highest judicial body held that the veterans court need only reverse denials on the basis of a "clear error."

"We hold that the VA’s determination that the evidence is in approximate balance is a predominantly factual determination reviewed only for clear error," Stripes and Stripes quoted Justice Clarence Thomas as writing in the majority opinion.