Williams v. Commissioner of Social Security
- Nelson Roman
- 7:19-cv-09108
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Williams v. Commissioner of Social Security, Judge Roman remanded the case for a new hearing and decision by a different administrative law judge.
Selina Williams and the Commissioner of Social Security; the case must be reconsidered by a different administrative law judge, with an opportunity for a hearing and a new decision.
What happened
In Williams v. Commissioner of Social Security, the court sent the case back to the Social Security Administration under a provision of federal law governing judicial review of agency decisions.
The remand followed the Supreme Court’s decision in Carr v. Saul, which held that a claimant may raise a challenge involving the appointment of Social Security administrative law judges for the first time in federal court. The judgment does not describe the underlying benefits claim or the specific challenge beyond this issue.
Judge Roman’s court ordered that a different administrative law judge further evaluate Williams’s claims, offer Williams a hearing, and issue a new decision.
The detailed version
- Williams v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 7:19-cv-09108
- Nelson Roman
- June 10, 2021
Background
The judgment concerns Selina Williams’s action against the Commissioner of Social Security. The opinion text provides no details about the underlying benefits claim or the agency’s original decision.
Reason for Remand
The court stated that, for the reasons in a June 10, 2021 stipulation and order, the action was remanded to the Commissioner under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The judgment connected the remand to the Supreme Court’s decision in Carr v. Saul, 141 S. Ct. 1352 (2021). Carr held that a claimant did not have to raise an Appointments Clause challenge before the Social Security Administration and could instead present that challenge for the first time in federal court.
Ruling and Effect
Judge Nelson Roman’s court remanded the action. On remand, the case is to be assigned to a different administrative law judge, meaning a Social Security agency judge; Williams is to be offered an opportunity for a hearing; and the administrative law judge is to issue a new decision. The judgment does not state the outcome of Williams’s underlying claim for benefits.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.