As set out in Social Security Ruling (SSR) 17-1p, an Error on the Face of the Evidence also exists when SSA:
-
(1)
applied a law that the Supreme Court of the United States later found unconstitutional;
and
-
(2)
the application of that law was material to our determination or decision.
The Office of the General Counsel (OGC) must advise whether (SSR) 17-1p applies to Supreme Court decisions before SSA may reopen a determination or decision.
OGC determined that (SSR) 17-1p applies to determinations or decisions materially affected by the Court’s decision
in the following court cases:
-
•
United States v. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013). The Supreme Court held that section 3 of the Defense of
Marriage Act (DOMA), which defined marriage for Federal benefit purposes as a union
between a man and a woman, was unconstitutional. As a result, DOMA no longer prohibited
the agency from recognizing a valid same-sex marriage for purposes of determining
entitlement to or eligibility for benefits in States that recognize same sex marriages.
SSA may reopen determinations or decisions, under normal reopening procedures, if:
-
(1)
the agency's determination or decision did not recognize a same-sex marriage because
of DOMA; and
-
(2)
non-recognition of the same-sex marriage affected eligibility, entitlement, or payment
amount.
-
•
Obergefell v. Hodges, 135 S. Ct. 2584 (2015). The Supreme Court held that same-sex couples have a constitutional
right to marry in, and have their valid marriages recognized by, all States. As a
result, the agency can recognize all valid same-sex marriages. SSA may reopen determinations
or decisions, under normal reopening procedures, where:
-
(1)
the agency's determination or decision did not recognize a same-sex marriage because
at the time State law prohibited such recognition; and
-
(2)
non-recognition of the same-sex marriage affected eligibility, entitlement, or payment
amount.
If unsure if one of the listed Supreme Court cases covers a claimant’s case, refer
the claimant’s case to OGC for a legal opinion.
If an SSA employee believes it may be appropriate, based on a review of a claimant’s
case or based on a request from a claimant, beneficiary, or recipient or their representative,
to reopen a determination or decision due to a law that the Supreme Court of the United
States later found unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court case is not included in
the case list above, the SSA employee must obtain an OGC opinion on whether (SSR) 17-1p applies to the relevant Supreme Court case before proceeding.