Felicano v. Department of Transportation (Differential Pay / Veterans' Benefits)

Send us Fan MailIn Feliciano v. Department of Transportation, the Supreme Court clarified the meaning of “during a national emergency” in a federal statute granting differential pay to federal civilian employees who serve as reservists. Nick Feliciano, a federal air traffic controller and Coast Guard reservist, sought differential pay for his active-duty service from 2012 to 2017 under 5 U.S.C. §5538. His service orders cited support for operations like Iraqi Freedom, but he was activated under a statute not specifically named in the law. The question was whether Feliciano qualified for differential pay simply because his service coincided with a declared national emergency, or whether he needed to prove that his service was substantively connected to that emergency.The Federal Circuit denied Feliciano’s claim, requiring a substantive link. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the statute’s plain language imposes a temporal condition only. Justice Gorsuch, writing for the majority, emphasized that the word “during” ordinarily conveys a timing requirement—not a purpose-based link—and that Congress knows how to demand a stronger nexus when it wants to. The Court found no statutory language or structure suggesting a substantive-connection requirement, noting that adding such a test would introduce interpretive confusion and possibly criminalize similar payments by private employers.Justice Gorsuch was joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Sotomayor, Kavanaugh, and Barrett. Justice Thomas dissented, joined by Justices Alito, Kagan, and Jackson.Read by RJ Dieken.Support the show