William
Frankfort,#2Author of original report
Tue, February 23, 2010
Lets try this! The law which you consider supreme over any other in enforcing 38 USC 5301? and shall not be liable to attachments, levy, or service by or under any legal or equitable process whatever, either before or after receipt by the beneficiary. How for decades the Veterans Administration, in processing State court orders, administratively garnish a veterans disability compensation as alimony. In doing so, refer to VA guidelines that supersede and override the linchpin of the Constitution, The Supremacy Clause, Article VI of the United States Constitution. This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. = Yes, this you know. However! The key word here is, notwithstanding which means, in spite of, despite. [N]otwithstanding also appears where State courts go to direct the VA by court order, the consent to enforcement and justify the taking of your, as well as thousands upon thousands veterans disability compensation as alimony awards. Using that exact same word, and then reference 5301 in order to make it quite clear any such waiver is not possible. Notwithstanding is found in Title 42 USC 659. Consent by the United States to income withholding, garnishment, and similar proceedings for enforcement of child support and alimony obligations. = Briefly; 42 USC 659(a) Consent to enforcement. Nothwithstanding any other provision of law (including section 407 of this title and section 5301 of title 38)moneys.. due from, or payable by, the United Statesto any individual, including members of the Armed Forces of the United States, shall be subjectto withholding in accordance with State lawto enforce the legal obligation of the individual to provide child support or alimony. = (h)(V) By the Secretary of Veterans Affairs as compensation for a service-connected disability paid by the Secretary to a former member of the Armed Forces who is receipt of retired or retainer pay if the former member has waived a portion of the retired or retainer pay in order to receive such compensation. = I went to a law professor looking for an answer to this question. I asked, I think I know the answer, however, I cannot pinpoint it to any particular reference of law other than the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the United States Constitution. I would like your opinion on the Article VI notwithstanding and the use of Notwithstanding any other provision of law found elsewhere in the United States Code.. I would think Article VI prevails, would you agree? He replied, Yes, the US Constitution always trumps any other form of law. = Here, your question is, or should be, which is it going to be? Either the United States Constitution Article VI notwithstanding or the 42 USC 659 administrative law notwithstanding? Here there is the legal certainty. Which is it going to be?
Jean
Naples,#3Consumer Comment
Thu, June 19, 2008
This article was written for a person that feels he was wronged. Indeed, this person is a veteran that was married to the same person for 34 years, had an affair( one of many)and walked out of his marriage like a coward. Judge Steinbeck did nothing more than follow the law. Never has anyone tried to attach this Veterans disability pay, but the same song and dance has been played over and over again trying to make someone, anyone feel sorry for the veteran. Social Security law states that payments can be attached for spousal and child support. That seems only right, why should the person that was at fault be the one to carry on as though nothing has happened?