- Paul Tsai China Center
- Collaboration for Research Integrity and Transparency (CRIT)
- Cultural Cognition Project
- Global Health Justice Partnership
- Gruber Program for Global Justice and Women’s Rights
- Human Rights Workshop: Current Issues & Events
- Information Society Project
- John M. Olin Center for Law, Economics and Public Policy
- Yale Law School Center for Global Legal Challenges
- Yale Law School Center for the Study of Corporate Law
- Yale Law School Center for Private Law
- Yale Law School Latin American Legal Studies
- Quinnipiac-Yale Dispute Resolution Workshop
- Bert Wasserman Workshop in Law and Finance
- Workshop on Chinese Legal Reform
- Studying Law at Yale
- Our Faculty
-
Centers & Workshops
- back
- Centers & Workshops
- Paul Tsai China Center
- Collaboration for Research Integrity and Transparency (CRIT)
- Cultural Cognition Project
- Global Health Justice Partnership
- Gruber Program for Global Justice and Women’s Rights
- Human Rights Workshop: Current Issues & Events
- Information Society Project
- John M. Olin Center for Law, Economics and Public Policy
- The Justice Collaboratory
- Abdallah S. Kamel Center for the Study of Islamic Law and Civilization
- Law, Economics & Organization Workshop
- Law, Ethics & Animals Program
- Law School Access Program
- Legal History Forum
- Legal Theory Workshop
- The Arthur Liman Center for Public Interest Law
- Middle East Legal Studies Seminar
- The Oscar M. Ruebhausen Fund
- Orville H. Schell, Jr. Center for International Human Rights
- Robina Foundation Human Rights Fellowship Initiative
- The Solomon Center for Health Law and Policy
- Yale Center for Law and Philosophy
- Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy
- Yale Law School Center for Global Legal Challenges
- Yale Law School Center for the Study of Corporate Law
- Yale Law School Center for Private Law
- Yale Law School Latin American Legal Studies
- Quinnipiac-Yale Dispute Resolution Workshop
- Bert Wasserman Workshop in Law and Finance
- Workshop on Chinese Legal Reform
- Student Life
- Admissions & Financial Aid
- YLS Today
C-123 Veterans Association
Veterans Legal Services Clinic
- NVLSP, VLSC White Paper: Veterans Who served on Guam ’62-75 Likely Exposed to Dioxin Herbicides
- C-123 Veterans Association
- Camp Lejeune Water Contamination
- Cardona v. Shinseki
- CT MOS Task Force
- Connecticut Veterans Legal Center
- Connecticut Veterans Legal Center Military Service Academies
- Cowles v. McHugh
- Dolphin v. McHugh
- Forms & Resources for Veterans Seeking Discharge Upgrade
- Giammarco v. Johnson
- IAVA-CT State Benefits Advocacy for Veterans with Bad Paper
- IAVA-CT: Protecting Veterans with Bad Paper from Employment Discrimination
- In re Trotman
- In re Venter
- Robert M. Cover Fellowship in the Veterans Legal Services Clinic
- Kennedy v. McCarthy
- Manker v. Spencer
- Military Sexual Trauma Rulemaking & Litigation
- Monk v. Mabus
- Monk v. Wilkie
- Palomares FOIA Litigation
- Petition for Rulemaking to Change VA Motto
- POD + CVLC MST FOIA Litigation
- POD+CVLC VA Bias FOIA Litigation
- Reid v. Donelan/In re Reid
- Reports and Manuals
- Service Women’s Action Network MST FOIA
- Service Woman’s Action Network Military Service Academies
- Shepherd v. McHugh
- Skaar v. Wilkie Class Palomares Action
- Spires v. James
- Terwilliger v. Cook
- The Campaign for a Presidential Pardon: Justice for Veterans with Bad Paper and Mental Illness
- Veterans Advocates Demand Release of Incarcerated Veterans Amid COVID-19
- Veterans Education Success
- VVA and NVCLR v. DOD – PTSD Upgrade FOIA Suit
- VVA-Personality/Adjustment Disorder
- VVA-PTSD Discharge Upgrades
- Home
- Studying Law at Yale
- Clinical and Experiential Learning
- Our Clinics
- Veterans Legal Services Clinic
- C-123 Veterans Association
The C-123 Veterans Association is an informal organization of approximately 1,600 members of the United States Air Force Reserve who, after the end of the Vietnam War, flew C-123 aircraft that had been used to spray Agent Orange and other herbicides in Vietnam. Numerous toxicology studies have been conducted on the aircraft since 1979 which demonstrate that the aircraft were contaminated with dioxin, an extremely toxic compound contained in military herbicides. In 2015, a study commissioned by the Department of Veterans Affairs (“VA”) confirmed that exposure to dioxin put these reservists at increased risk of numerous diseases and disabilities.
Before the study, VA had resisted recognizing that post-war C-123 aircraft personnel were, like Vietnam veterans, exposed to dioxin. Now that the study has left little doubt as to these reservists’ exposure, VA is contending that it lacks the legal authority to compensate those reservists who were exposed and now suffer diseases that by law are presumed to be connected with Agent Orange.
VA’s assertion is incorrect—it has authority under existing law to provide benefits to these injured reservists, many of whom have waited for years while suffering from terrible diseases and disabilities. In the spring of 2015, students in the clinic prepared memoranda on behalf of the C-123 Veterans Association and Vietnam Veterans of America explaining why VA has the legal authority to compensate these reservists. Punting this problem to Congress is unnecessary and unjust for this group of reservists, many who are very ill and elderly and cannot afford to wait.
Letter – the Active Military Status of C-123 Reservists (April 13, 2015)
Memorandum – VA authority under existing statutes (April 16, 2015)
Prior to the 2015 study, students in the clinic had prepared a statement connecting existing medical evidence to the VA regulatory standards for illnesses associated with Agent Orange on behalf of the members of the Association. That memo can be found here.