Feliciano v. Department Of Transportation

Background

An FAA air traffic controller who also served as a Coast Guard reservist was called to active duty from July 2012 to February 2017 under 10 U.S.C. §12301(d). He served aboard a Coast Guard ship escorting vessels and his orders said he was called “in support of” contingency operations, including Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom. He did not receive differential pay and the Merit Systems Protection Board and the Federal Circuit denied his claim, applying a rule that required a substantive connection to a particular national emergency.

Reasoning

The Court examined whether the phrase “during a national emergency” requires only that service occur while an emergency is ongoing or also requires a substantive link to that emergency. The majority concluded the ordinary meaning of “during” is temporal. It noted that Congress uses different phrasing when it wants a relational requirement, pointed to related statutes and Congressional Budget Office practice, and rejected the government’s surplusage and policy arguments. The Court therefore reversed the Federal Circuit and held that temporal coincidence with a declared national emergency suffices to trigger differential pay under the statutes at issue.

Real world impact

The ruling makes it easier for federal civilian reservists to obtain differential pay when their active duty overlaps a declared national emergency. Civilian employers may face increased obligations to make up pay differences, and the decision could affect how related criminal and administrative rules are applied. The case was reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Court’s interpretation.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Thomas dissented, arguing the phrase should reach only activations that occur in the course of operations responding to a national emergency and warning of superfluity and ripple effects.