Feres Case Petitioned to the Supreme Court
Staff Sgt. Ryan Carter, a former IT airman with the Maryland Air National Guard, walked into Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in 2018 for what was supposed to be a routine back surgery to alleviate chronic neck pain. Tragically, the procedure left him paralyzed from the chest down, with limited use of his left arm. Since then, Carter and his wife, Kathleen Cole, have been engaged in a grueling legal battle against the military hospital and the surgeon responsible for the operation, seeking accountability for the life-altering injury that Carter sustained.
The primary obstacle in their quest for justice has been the Feres Doctrine, a controversial legal precedent established by the Supreme Court in 1950, which bars service members from suing the military for injuries deemed “incident to service.” This doctrine has been used for decades to block military medical malpractice lawsuits, leaving countless service members without legal recourse for the harm they’ve suffered at the hands of military healthcare providers.After six previous attempts to file administrative claims or civil suits—all of which were denied or dismissed—Carter’s attorney, Christopher Casciano, filed a petition with the Supreme Court on June 5, 2024. The petition asks the Court to reconsider the Feres Doctrine, specifically questioning whether it should apply when a service member was not on active duty at the time of the injury or was retroactively placed on active duty status. The petition also calls for a reexamination of the entire Feres Doctrine, arguing that it should be clarified, limited, or even overruled.
Carter’s case highlights the broader, systemic issues with the Feres Doctrine, which has been used to prevent service members from seeking justice for over 70 years. Despite a 2019 legislative change allowing service members to file malpractice claims through their service branches, the current system remains deeply flawed. If a claim is denied by the military, service members have no further recourse in the courts. This leaves many, like Carter, trapped in a bureaucratic nightmare where their suffering goes unaddressed and unresolved.
Carter and Cole’s experience is a poignant reminder of the human cost of this legal doctrine. Following the surgery, Carter was retroactively placed on active duty by the Air National Guard, a move that Casciano believes was strategically made to trigger the Feres Doctrine and block any potential legal action. This retroactive status change, 82 days after Carter’s injury, is a key element of their Supreme Court petition, as it calls into question the fairness and application of the Feres Doctrine in cases where service members were effectively veterans at the time of their injuries.
Living in Tampa, Florida, Carter and Cole now face daily challenges that are compounded by their ongoing legal struggle. Carter, who requires round-the-clock care, receives some support from the VA, but staff shortages mean that there are days when he cannot even get out of bed. The couple, isolated from their former support network in Baltimore, also face financial hardships, with neither able to work and no means to afford a wheelchair-accessible van.
Despite their personal hardships, Ryan Carter and Kathleen Cole remain committed to their fight, not just for themselves but for all service members who might face similar injustices in the future. We are working to rally support from organizations and others interested in challenging the Feres Doctrine, hoping that documented backing might persuade the Supreme Court to hear Carter’s case—a rare occurrence, as less than 100 of the roughly 8,000 petitions submitted to the Court each year are granted.
On July 30, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court requested a response from the government on Carter’s Feres case.
You can track the status of Ryan Carter’s case with the Supreme Court here: STATUS OF RYAN CARTER’S PETITION
An amicus brief (short for amicus curiae brief, meaning "friend of the court") is a legal document filed in appellate court cases, including the Supreme Court, by non-litigants with a strong interest in the subject matter. These briefs provide additional information, arguments, or perspectives to assist the court in making its decision.
An amicus brief is typically submitted by individuals, organizations, or entities who are not directly involved in the case but believe that the court's decision could have broader implications beyond the parties involved. By offering expert insights, data, or arguments, these "friends of the court" aim to influence the outcome of the case in a way that aligns with their interests or concerns.
On August 29th, Coalition of Heroes filed an amicus brief alongside Coalition of Heroes, bipartisan members of Congress, National Military Families Association, Reserve Organization of America, MG William K. Suter (Ret.), and 22 other leading organizations in support of petitioners.
Next steps: The government will file its response to the cert. petition, after which the petitioners will have the opportunity to reply. The government may or may not expressly address an amicus brief. While they aren't required to do so, and conventional wisdom often dictates otherwise, it’s common for the party opposing cert. to ignore even the most compelling amici. Rest assured that our filing will be closely studied both by the Court and important onlookers who shape the long-term debate. The Court's decision on whether or not to grant review will occur later this fall on a date that can't be precisely predicted.
To read Ryan Carter’s Petition to the Supreme Court: RYAN CARTER’S PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI.
To read our Amicus brief filed in support of Ryan Carter’s Case: COALITION OF HEROES AMICUS BRIEF