Washington v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner

On March 4, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia decided Washington v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner. Plaintiff Jane Washington challenged the denial of her Social Security Disability Insurance benefits, arguing the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ignored substantial medical evidence of her fibromyalgia and mental impairments. After exhausting administrative appeals, she claimed the ALJ violated due process by failing to fully develop the record and improperly discounting treating source opinions. The federal court reviewed the record and found the ALJ had cherry-picked evidence, misapplied the treating physician rule, and failed to properly evaluate subjective symptom testimony. Concluding the Commissioner’s final decision lacked substantial evidence, the court reversed the denial and remanded the case for a new hearing before a different ALJ, emphasizing that fair adjudication requires rigorous assessment of all medical evidence under SSA regulations.

The court reversed the Commissioner’s final decision and remanded the case for further proceedings, ordering a de novo hearing before a new ALJ with instructions to reevaluate the medical evidence and claimant testimony under correct legal standards.

Whether the ALJ’s denial of disability benefits was supported by substantial evidence, and whether the claimant’s due process rights were violated by the failure to properly weigh medical opinions and fully develop the administrative record.

The decision reinforced judicial oversight of SSA disability determinations, reminded ALJs to avoid cherry-picking evidence, and strengthened procedural protections for claimants. It has been cited in subsequent challenges to arbitrary denials and encouraged more transparent, claimant-focused hearings.