A Win for Structural Integrity in Flinton v. Commissioner

Flinton applied for Social Security disability benefits in 2015 after being hospitalized for schizophrenia. Her claim was denied in 2018 by ALJ Mark Solomon—before his appointment was constitutionally ratified under the Appointments Clause, as clarified by the Supreme Court in Lucia v. SEC (2018). On remand from federal court (for substantive errors), the SSA sent the case back to the same ALJ—this time post-ratification. He partially granted benefits, finding a one-year period of disability.

But Flinton appealed again, this time raising an Appointments Clause challenge. The district court wasn’t convinced. The Second Circuit was.

🧠 What the Court Said:

• The Court held that once a claimant's case is tainted by an unconstitutional adjudication, Lucia requires a new hearing before a different ALJ.

• The fact that ALJ Solomon had since been properly appointed didn’t cure the original structural defect.

• It didn’t matter that the original decision was vacated on the merits—what matters is that Flinton never got the remedy Lucia demands: a fresh hearing before a new judge.

• The Court emphasized that structural constitutional violations demand structural remedies—even if the new decision differed from the old one.

  
  

⚖️ Why It Matters:

• The Second Circuit joined the Fourth and Ninth Circuits in enforcing the full remedy from Lucia, creating a deepening circuit split with the Eleventh Circuit’s decision in Raper.

• This ruling ensures that ALJs can’t re-adjudicate cases they previously ruled on while unconstitutionally appointed, even post-ratification.

• It sends a strong signal that Appointments Clause violations don’t just disappear with a ratification—they require a clean slate.

  
  

🧩 Takeaway for Practitioners: If your client’s claim was once decided by an ALJ before their appointment was ratified, and that ALJ heard the case again later—you may have a viable Lucia claim, regardless of whether the remand was for constitutional or substantive reasons. The Court made it clear: structure matters, and process isn’t just a formality.

Got any questions? Schedule a consultation with us. I’m here to help. It’s a lot to take in, but we’ll get through it together. After all, navigating these waters is always easier when you’ve got someone to chat with.