Skip to main content
· 1/13/2022

Babcock v. Kijakazi

Citations

  • 595 U.S. 77
  • 211 L. Ed. 2d 424
  • 142 S. Ct. 641

About this case

Jump to content

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2022 United States Supreme Court case

Babcock v. Kijakazi, 595 U.S. 77 (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that civil-service pension payments based on employment as a dual-status military technician are not payments based on "service as a member of a uniformed service" under 42 U.S.C.  § 415(1)(7)(A)(III) .[1] [2]

Description

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Babcock_v._Kijakazi&action=edit&section=1 "Edit section: Description")
]

Babcock worked as a dual-status technician for the National Guard from 1975 to 2009, and he was hired on as a civilian before some staffing organization changes in 1984. As part of his job, he was required to wear a uniform every day.[2]

In essence, the government's position was that Babcock was hired as a civilian and was never a member of the National Guard . Accordingly, the government reduced his Social Security benefits because an exception that shielded service members from the reduction did not cover Babcock. The Supreme Court agreed with the government's position, saying the requirement that the employee wear a uniform is not what makes one a member of a uniformed service.[2]

See also

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Babcock_v._Kijakazi&action=edit&section=2 "Edit section: See also")
]

References

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Babcock_v._Kijakazi&action=edit&section=3 "Edit section: References")
]

  1. Babcock v. Kijakazi, No. 20-480 , 595 U.S. ___ (2022).
  2. Jump up to: 1 2 3 "Justices limit Social Security benefits of "dual-status" technicians in National Guard" . SCOTUSblog. January 14, 2022. Retrieved October 30, 2024.

External links

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Babcock_v._Kijakazi&action=edit&section=4 "Edit section: External links")
]

  • Text of Babcock v. Kijakazi, No. 20-480, 595 U.S. ___ (2022) is available from: Justia

This article incorporates written opinion of a United States federal court . As a work of the U.S. federal government , the text is in the **public domain **.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Babcock_v._Kijakazi&oldid=1330682340 "

Categories :

Hidden categories:

Search

Search

Babcock v. Kijakazi

Add languages Add topic

Editorial context from Wikipedia (CC-BY-SA 4.0).

Judges: Amy Coney Barrett

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.