Skip to content
Project Curia
Supreme Court decisions
No. 22-888Apr 16, 2024Armed Forces and National SecurityReversed and remanded

The question

Whether a veteran entitled to educational benefits under both the Montgomery and Post-9/11 GI Bills through separate periods of service may use his Post-9/11 benefits without being subject to Section 3327(d)(2)'s durational limit tying them to the length of unused Montgomery benefits.

Rudisill v. McDonough

What the Court decided

The Court reversed the Federal Circuit and ruled for the veteran. A servicemember who accrues educational benefits under both the Montgomery and Post-9/11 GI Bills through separate periods of service may use either benefit, in any order, up to the 48-month aggregate cap in Section 3695(a). Because the veteran holds two separate entitlements and is simply using one of them, the coordination and election provisions in Sections 3322(d) and 3327 do not apply, so Section 3327(d)(2)'s 36-month limit does not cap his benefits.

How the justices split

7-2
In favor 7Against 2
Jackson
Roberts
Sotomayor
Kagan
Gorsuch
Kavanaugh
Barrett
Thomas
Alito

The Court's opinion

Jackson, joined by Roberts, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett

The statutory text gives Rudisill two separate benefits entitlements, one under each GI Bill, earned through separate periods of service, and the VA is obligated to pay up to 48 months absent a specified limit. Section 3322(d)'s coordination clause does not apply because it addresses coordinating a single entitlement through a swap, not a veteran using one of two separately earned entitlements. The Section 3327(a) election is optional, and Section 3327(d)(2)'s 36-month limit governs only the consequences of making that swap election, so it does not restrict a veteran who declines to swap.

Concurring

Kavanaugh, joined by Barrett

Kavanaugh filed a concurring opinion, joined by Barrett, while also joining the opinion of the Court.

Dissenting

Thomas, joined by Alito

Thomas filed a dissenting opinion, joined by Alito, disagreeing with the Court's reading of the statute and its conclusion that Section 3327(d)(2)'s durational limit does not apply to the veteran.

How we know · 5 sourced claims
  • The Court held that servicemembers who accrue benefits under both the Montgomery and Post-9/11 GI Bills through separate periods of service may use either one, in any order, up to the 48-month aggregate-benefits cap.

    Source: syllabus, Held

  • The Court reversed and remanded the Federal Circuit's en banc judgment reported at 55 F. 4th 879.

    Source: syllabus, Held

  • The Court reasoned that Rudisill earned two separate entitlements and that Section 3327(d)(2)'s 36-month limit applies only to the consequences of making a Section 3327(a) swap election, which is optional.

    Source: syllabus, Held

  • Justice Jackson delivered the opinion of the Court, joined by Roberts, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett.

    Source: syllabus, lineup

  • Justice Kavanaugh filed a concurring opinion joined by Barrett, and Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion joined by Alito.

    Source: syllabus, lineup

Read the opinion on supremecourt.gov