Butler v. Commissioner of Social Security
- Andrew Krause
- 7:17-cv-04100
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Butler v. Commissioner of Social Security, Judge Krause remanded the case for a new hearing before a different administrative judge.
Butler’s Social Security case must be reassigned by the Appeals Council to a different Administrative Law Judge for a new hearing and decision; the Commissioner of Social Security must conduct further proceedings.
What happened
In Butler v. Commissioner of Social Security, the court reversed and sent the case back to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings. Butler had raised a claim under the Constitution's rule about how administrative judges are appointed.
The court relied on a 2021 Supreme Court decision holding that a claimant may raise this type of appointment claim for the first time in federal court. On remand, the Appeals Council must assign Butler's case to a different Administrative Law Judge, provide a new hearing, and issue a new decision.
Judge Andrew Krause is identified in the case information supplied for this judgment. The judgment was dated June 9, 2021, and ordered the remand under sentence four of the federal Social Security review statute.
The detailed version
- Butler v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 7:17-cv-04100
- Andrew Krause
- June 9, 2021
Background
Butler brought this Social Security case against Andrew Saul, identified in the caption as the Commissioner of Social Security. The judgment states that Butler raised a claim under the Appointments Clause, the constitutional provision governing the appointment of certain federal officers, in federal court.
Court’s reasoning
The court relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Carr v. Saul, 141 S. Ct. 1352 (2021). That decision held that a claimant does not have to raise an Appointments Clause claim before the Social Security Administration and may raise it for the first time in federal court. Because Butler raised such a claim before this court, the court ordered further administrative proceedings.
Ruling and effect
The judgment ordered that the action be reversed and remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). On remand, the Appeals Council must assign Butler’s case to a different Administrative Law Judge, offer Butler a new hearing, and issue a new decision. The judgment does not state what that new decision must be or resolve the underlying Social Security claims.
The document is signed by the clerk of court, Ruby J. Krajick, rather than by the judge identified in the supplied case information.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.