What Stood Out in Veteran Benefits Arguments at High Court

Samuel Goldstein authored an article for Law360 discussing the Supreme Court hearing the oral argument in Arellano v. McDonough, which involves veterans’ benefits and exceptions to statutory filing deadlines, and addresses whether the statutory deadline to apply for certain benefits can be equitably tolled – or, extended due to some unusual circumstance that prevented a litigant from making a timely filing.

“It was difficult to predict how Arellano might come out based on oral argument,” Samuel wrote. “The justices asked fewer questions than usual – perhaps in part because the session followed a nearly two-hour-long argument in a significant Voting Rights Act case.”

He added: “The court’s recent decisions generally, though not uniformly, have construed statutory filing requirements as flexible claims-processing rules rather than strict mandates. So if that trend continues, one might expect Arellano to prevail. But both sides faced some challenging questions, and no clear resolution had emerged by the time the argument concluded.”

 Read the full article.