No. 20-480October Term 2020Decided Jan 13, 2022Updated May 25, 2026
Babcock v. Kijakazi
The case asked whether a retired National Guard dual-status technician’s civil-service pension should be treated as a pension based entirely on military service, which would prevent the Social Security Administration from reducing his benefits under the windfall elimination provision.
Case status
Decided 8-1 · January 13, 2022 · Opinion by Justice Barrett
Read the opinion (PDF)- Current stage
- Decided
- Latest event
- Decision released Jan 13, 2022
- What it's about
The case asked whether a retired National Guard dual-status technician’s civil-service pension should be treated as a pension based entirely on military service, which would prevent the Social Security Administration from reducing his benefits under the windfall elimination provision. The Supreme Court held that this kind of pension is based on civilian employment, not wholly on service as a member of a uniformed service.
Question presented
Is a civil-service pension payment based on dual-status military technician service to the National Guard a payment based wholly on service as a member of a uniformed service?
- Case path
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit / Decision released Jan 13, 2022
- Area
Decided Supreme Court case
Timing
Decided January 13, 2022
The Court released its decision on January 13, 2022 without hearing oral argument.
Documents
Activity
Docket activity3
Brief added: Questions Presented
May 25, 2026 | Court records
Opinion added: opinion
Jan 13, 2022 | Court records
Brief added: Petition
Oct 8, 2020 | Court records
Related cases




Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary-source trail available.
- Note
- Plain-English explainer. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Jul 25, 2026
- Method
- Methodology