Kisor v. Wilkie

Whether Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co. and Auer v. Robbins, which require the Court to defer to an agency's interpretation of its own regulation, should be overruled.

Petitioner, a Marine Corps veteran, sued the Department of Veterans Affairs (the VA), to recover retroactive disability benefits related to his post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Petitioner’s initial claim for disability benefits was filed and denied in 1983, after a medical examiner diagnosed Petitioner with a personality disorder rather than PTSD. In 2006, Petitioner submitted a request to reopen his claim. Petitioner then submitted documentation diagnosing him with PTSD and verifying his participating in the Vietnam War. Under VA regulations, a previously denied claim may be reopened if “relevant” official records existed but had not been considered at the time the claim was denied. The VA review board found the documents were not “relevant” and denied Petitioner’s request. Upon appeal, the Veterans Court and later the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision. The Federal Circuit held that pursuant to Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co., 325 U.S. 410 (1945) and Auer v. Robbins, 519 U.S. 452 (1997), a court must defer to an agency’s own interpretation of its regulations, unless such interpretation is plainly erroneous or inconsistent. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to determine whether Bowles and Ayer should be overruled. Petitioner argues that the Courts’ practice of deferring to agency interpretations has no constitutional or legislative authority. Furthermore, Petitioner argues that this practice raises constitutional concerns regarding the separation of powers.