Yesterday, a federal judge in San Francisco dismissed a lawsuit filed by veterans’ groups that alleges the Department of Veteran’s Affairs is not providing adequate mental health services to veterans. In a nutshell, the judge found that, although many of the claims made by the veterans’ advocates are, in fact, a reality, it is outside the court’s jurisdiction to change the system or compel the federal government to act.
According to the San Francisco Chronicle, U.S. District Judge Samuel Conti confirmed that:
The VA is understaffed and takes an average of nearly 4 1/2 years to hear veterans' appeals of benefit denials, and a long-range improvement plan the agency adopted four years ago is still mostly in the pilot stages, the judge said.
...
But Conti said, "The remedies sought by plaintiffs are beyond the power of this court and would call for a complete overhaul of the VA system.
Is a complete overhaul of the system really necessary to provide adequate services to veterans? The Chronicle goes on to report that Paul Sullivan, executive director of Veterans for Common Sense, one of the plaintiff organizations, chose to look on the bright side of the ruling.
Conti "confirmed many of our allegations" and issued "a huge alarm bell for Congress and the VA to take action now," said Sullivan, a Gulf War veteran.
Hopefully, this ruling will impel our nation’s leaders to work to ensure veterans receive mental health care services they need and deserve.
Recently Federal District Judge Samuel Conti decided in the class action lawsuit in which we (Veterans United For Truth and Veterans for Common Sense) were plaintiffs, that the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) was failing in many cases in providing mental health services to returning veterans. Unfortunately he also decided that he did not have jurisdiction at his level to compel changes in the DVA’s procedures.
While we are disappointed with Judge Conti's decision that he lacked jurisdiction, and do not agree that we did not prove the “systemic” nature of these problems, this outcome is far from being all bad. We knew that it was a crap shoot going in, but we were sure that he had the necessary jurisdiction. We also knew that no matter how he decided, the case would most likely end up before the Supreme Court. Of course we had hoped to be defending Judge Conti's decision against an appeal by the DVA; now we will be appealing his decision in the Ninth Circuit.
When we started out, we knew that we were in it for the long haul. We won round one, just by getting the case heard in federal court, since the DVA and the Department of Justice both attempted multiple times to have us disqualified as plaintiffs, and denied that the federal court had any right even to examine DVA procedures and policies..
We lost part of round two. It may be a setback, but it succeeded in large part since Judge Conti’s ruling expressed agreement with much of our complaint. Additionally The DVA has been exposed not only to the Congress, but also to the national and international media, who have stepped up their reporting on the shoddy treatment that the VA has been providing to returning veterans, and to the repeated delay and denial of service by the DVA..
Americas veterans will be forever in the debt of Morrison & Foerster, LLP and Disability Rights Advocates, the two law firms that took on the DVA pro bono.
Bob Handy, HMC USN (Ret)
Chair, Veterans United For Truth. Inc
www.vuft.org
PO Box 4476
Santa Barbara Ca 93140
805 455 5259 cell
Posted by: Bob Handy | June 29, 2008 at 07:42 AM