KEY TAKEAWAYS: Federal court invalidates Louisiana’s 2024 PLUS Act for veterans. Law violated federal supremacy and First Amendment rights. Unauthorized consultants barred from taking fees from veterans’ benefits. Case marks legal win for attorney John B. Wells, Navy veteran.   A fe deral court has struck down a 2024 Louisiana law that sought to let unauthorized consultants take a cut of benefit payments for disabled veterans in exchange for helping them apply for those benefits. U.S. District Court Judge Brian A. Jackson for the Middle District of Louisiana granted a summary judgment motion against the state Friday, ruling the Preserving Lawful Utilization of Services for Veterans Act is unconstitutional. A summary judgment occurs when a judge finds one side has presented enough evidence to win the case without going to trial. Specifically, Jackson ruled the PLUS Act violates the supremacy clause of Article VI of the U.S. Constitution because federal law regulating Veterans Affairs disability claims supersedes Louisiana’s law. Additionally, a mandatory disclosure provision in the act violates the First Amendment because it compels speech without a reasonable factual basis, wrote Jackson, a federal court appointee of former President Barack Obama. The case, Military-Veterans Advocacy Inc. v. Landry, marks a significant win for Slidell lawyer John B. Wells, a retired U.S. Navy commander who represents veterans in legal disputes with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. He filed the lawsuit in 2024 after the Louisiana Legislature approved the PLUS Act, modeled after similarly named federal legislation that has long been stalled in Congress. “We’re very happy with the opinion,” Wells said in a phone interview. “We think it’s going to be precedent setting.” Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill, who is defending the law, said the matter is far from over. “We disagree with the opinion and intend to file an appeal,” Murrill said in an email. The case is the first of its kind to address an issue that has divided Republicans and members of the disabled veteran community. After failing to gain traction in Congress, proponents of the PLUS Act brought it to state legislatures across the country. Adopted in 2024, the act made Louisiana the first state to legalize the controversial and lucrative industry of “claims consulting” that currently operates in the shadows of an unenforced federal law pertaining to veterans’ disability claims. Search the internet for “VA claims consulting,” and it will generate listings for hundreds of websites that promise to help veterans get large disability checks from Veterans Affairs. In exchange, the consultants take a cut of the benefits at shares of up to $12,500 under Louisiana’s PLUS Act. Many of the consulting websites first appeared in 2022 after President Joe Biden signed the PACT Act into law. It approved billions in additional benefits for veterans exposed to hazards such as burn pits and Agent Orange. Proponents of the practice say they’re providing private consulting that some disabled veterans are willing to pay for. But critics say it’s exploitative because some of the same services are available for free from the Louisiana Department of Veterans Affairs and VA-accredited organizations such as the American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars. The National Association of Veteran Rights, a lobbying arm for the industry, said Louisiana’s law established guardrails to prevent exploitation. “SB 159 established important guardrails to prevent predatory solicitation and ensure fee transparency, while preserving Veterans’ right to seek lawful assistance,” NAVR Vice President Ashleigh Barry said in an email. “With those safeguards removed, the regulatory framework is less defined, creating potential risk for Veterans navigating an already complex benefits system. NAVR is actively working with Louisiana lawmakers to address the court’s concerns and restore balanced protections that safeguard Veterans while maintaining their freedom of choice.” But the practice might still be illegal. Under federal law, the Department of Veterans Affairs requires accreditation of any agent or attorney who helps disabled veterans prepare or process claims. The approval process involves a background check and a written exam to ensure consultants can properly assist veterans with claims and represent them in appeals. But in 2006, for reasons that are unclear, Congress removed the penalties that once existed under the law. Additionally, federal law permits only authorized or VA-accredited agents and attorneys to charge fees for helping veterans with disability claims, and they can only charge fees for assisting with the longer, more complicated appeals process. That’s where lawyers like Wells have carved out a niche legal practice. Louisiana’s PLUS Act, however, allows unauthorized consultants, who are not attorneys, to offer similar advice and assistance to disabled veterans without officially representing them, Wells said. The claims consultants reap all of the financial rewards with none of the accountability or oversight from Veterans Affairs or the Louisiana Bar Association, he said. Last week’s ruling did not address that particular argument but found the law unconstitutional under Article VI and the First Amendment, with Jackson writing that Louisiana’s law “impedes the realization of Congress’s goal of ensuring that veterans have access to qualified representatives to assist them in pursuing claims for VA benefits.” The First Amendment ruling stems from a mandatory disclosure provision in the Louisiana law that requires all claims consultants and attorneys to tell their clients, verbally and in writing, that the same services are available for free from the Louisiana Department of Veterans Affairs or a veteran service organization like the VFW. Although lawmakers included the disclosure provision as a way to prevent disabled veterans from falling victim to swindlers, it was a big problem for lawyers who primarily litigate appeals and complex legal representation that cannot be obtained for free from a veteran service organization. The disclosure statement amounted to unreasonably compelled speech, the court found. While the court’s ruling invalidates Louisiana’s law, it’s unlikely to have an impact on unauthorized claims consulting, which remains unenforced at the federal level. A similar case is pending in a federal court in New Jersey, where a state law does the opposite of Louisiana’s PLUS Act and prohibits unauthorized claims consulting. ...read more read less