75 Am. U. L. Rev. F. 985 (2026).

Abstract

U.S. veterans should possess the same access to courts as other Americans, but a misreading of a federal law has led many veterans to be denied an opportunity to assert their civil rights in any judicial forum. That law—38 U.S.C. § 511—grants exclusive jurisdiction over certain federal veterans benefits appeals to a specialized Article I court, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. But federal judges and Department of Veterans Affairs leaders have mistakenly interpreted that grant of exclusive jurisdiction to also close the door to Article III courts, leading veterans’ meritorious claims of systemic discrimination and injustice to be dismissed and ignored. This Article is the first scholarly piece to explore in depth the history, text, and statutory context of 38 U.S.C. § 511, and the statute’s impact on veterans’ ability to assert their rights to remedy injustices in how they access benefits and care. This Article defines the line that separates veterans claims between generalist Article III and specialized Article I court review. The Article concludes with a discussion of certain constitutional and statutory claims that veterans must be able to bring in Article III courts to uphold their rights and advance reform.

* Associate Director of the Veterans Law & Disability Benefits Clinic, Legal Services Center of Harvard Law School; Senior Clinical Instructor and Lecturer-On-Law, Harvard Law School. Dana Montalto expresses her deepest thanks to Daniel Nagin, Bart Stichman, and Michael Wishnie for their feedback and guidance and her immense gratitude to her wonderful colleagues Julia Devanthéry, Rebecca Greening, Deborah Lolai, Alexa Rosenbloom, Marianna Yang, and Deena Zakim for their support through the writing process.