Veterans Won the Battle. Collins Won the War.

THE GIST

Veterans pushed back hard on the Ingram medication rule, and Collins blinked in 48 hours. That felt like a win. It wasn't — not completely. While everyone was arguing about ratings, Collins quietly field-tested something far more dangerous: a blueprint for overriding federal courts without going through the process that makes oversight possible. The rule is halted. The blueprint is intact. And next time, he'll do it slower.

Everyone is celebrating. I get it. Ten thousand comments in 60 hours. VSOs mobilized. Collins backed down in two days. Veterans showed up and the system responded.

Now let me tell you what actually happened.

Collins didn't lose. He ran a test. And it worked.

The Real Story Wasn't the Rule

The rule was a problem. But it was a visible problem — one that produced an immediate, visceral reaction because veterans understood exactly what it meant for their wallets. Stop taking your medication or lose your rating. That's a gut punch. It got people moving.

What it also did was pull every eye in the room toward the substance and away from the mechanism.

The mechanism is the story.

On February 17, 2026, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs used an interim final rule to override three federal court decisions spanning 14 years. He skipped the notice-and-comment period that exists so the public can weigh in before a rule takes effect. He invoked emergency authority to bypass the 60-day Congressional Review Act waiting period — even though his own agency's regulatory office had classified this as a major rule with over $100 million in annual economic impact. He made it effective immediately.

Then, when the response was ferocious, he halted enforcement two days later and called the outrage "fake news."

He did not rescind the rule. The regulation is still in the Federal Register. The eCFR still shows the new language. He just told his people to stand down.

What Courts Are For

The Jones, McCarroll, and Ingram decisions weren't radical. They were the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims doing its job — reading VA's own regulation and determining what it meant. The CAVC spent over a decade telling VA that 38 CFR § 4.10, as written, required examiners to account for medication effects. Each decision built on the last. Ingram v. Collins, 38 Vet. App. 130 (2025), decided March 12, 2025, extended the reasoning to musculoskeletal conditions.

Collins disagreed with that interpretation. Fine. Agencies disagree with courts. There's a process for that. You publish a proposed rule. You take public comment. You respond to that comment. You wait the required period. You finalize. You defend it in court if challenged.

That process is slow by design. It creates a record. It forces the agency to justify its reasoning. It gives veterans, VSOs, and Congress visibility before a change takes effect. It gives courts something to review.

Collins skipped all of it.

His justification — 350,000 pending claims, systemic disruption, administrative emergency — got shredded by the response it triggered. You cannot credibly claim that allowing public comment is "impracticable and contrary to the public interest" when 10,000 members of the public respond in 60 hours the moment they find out.

But here's the thing about running a test: even a failed test gives you data.

The Blueprint

Collins now knows the following:

The process works if he goes slower. The outrage was as much about speed and secrecy as it was about substance. Veterans were angry because VA dropped a major rule change at midnight with zero warning. The "no notice, immediate effect" piece is what produced 10,000 comments in 60 hours. That's the variable he can adjust.

He also knows the coalition that beat him. VSOs across the political spectrum — American Legion, VFW, DAV, Burn Pits 360, IAVA, Paralyzed Veterans of America — unified against it. That coalition formed because the target was obvious and the timeline was compressed. Give that coalition six months of notice-and-comment, let the issue get complex and technical, and it will not hold together the same way.

Collins framed his retreat carefully. He said the rule was halted because of how it was "characterized" — not because the policy was wrong. He said it was issued "to protect Veterans' benefits in the wake of an ongoing court action." He never conceded the substance. He walked away from the fight, not the goal.

The goal is still on the record. The Federal Circuit case is still alive. The comment period is still open. VA still wants to resolve the Ingram problem on its own terms.

What the VSOs Got Right and Wrong

Most of the major organizations landed on the right side of the substance. They were correct that the rule was harmful, that the process was illegitimate, and that veterans shouldn't have to choose between their health and their benefits.

The VFW got it most right. VFW National Commander Carol Whitmore didn't just praise the halt — she called for full rescission. "This interim rule puts that stability at risk, and it must be withdrawn." That's the correct position. Halted enforcement is a promise. Formal rescission is a legal commitment. We don't have the latter.

Where the VSO response fell short — and where social media made it worse — was the amplification of the most alarming interpretation possible. "VA is coming for your rating." "They're going to lower your disability." That framing was understandable. It was also, for most veterans, inaccurate. And it swallowed the process story whole.

A veteran who understands that VA tried to override courts without due process is a veteran who stays vigilant for the next attempt. A veteran who thinks Collins tried to steal their rating and got beaten back is a veteran who thinks the fight is over.

The fight is not over.

The Civ Div Was Right

I don't agree with everything The Civ Div says. But on this, Clay Simms — the veteran YouTuber with 80,000+ subscribers who built his channel on VA claims education — was right and most of the internet was wrong.

His argument: the VA has always rated on medicated baseline — that's why the Jones/Ingram line of cases had to fight for 14 years to get courts to say otherwise. The rule didn't change how veterans are being evaluated today. The real issue is that the Secretary put his direct interpretation of 4.10 into federal regulation specifically to avoid complying with a court. That's the issue. Not the ratings.

When the loudest voices in the room are screaming "they're taking your rating," that's all anyone hears. The quieter, harder argument — that an executive agency just demonstrated it can override federal courts through emergency rulemaking with no notice and no process — gets lost.

That argument matters more. It will matter more next time.

What Veterans Actually Won

The 48-hour reversal isn't nothing. Ten thousand comments in 60 hours is not nothing. VSO unity is not nothing. Collins backing down is not nothing.

But what veterans won is time. The rule is halted. The Federal Circuit case continues. The comment record is being built. The Laffon petition is filed.

Time is only useful if it's used.

The comment period closes April 20. Every comment filed strengthens the legal record against re-implementation and raises the political cost of another attempt. The Federal Circuit will eventually rule on Ingram. If they rule against VA, expect another attempt at a rule — this time, done by the book, with a proper comment period, six to twelve months out, when the news cycle has moved on and the coalition is harder to reassemble.

That's the scenario to prepare for. Not this one. This one is over.

The One Thing Collins Can't Take Back

He showed his hand.

VA's filing in the Federal Register said the agency would pay out additional disability compensation "based on levels that veterans are not actually experiencing." That's VA, in writing, on the record, arguing that the court-mandated standard produces compensation that veterans don't deserve.

That is now in the administrative record. If VA tries again, that language follows them into court.

Collins wanted to solve the Ingram problem quietly, quickly, and permanently. He got the opposite: a loud, public, documented fight that put VA's intent on the record and activated every major VSO and several law firms in the Federal Circuit simultaneously.

Veterans won the battle. But the war — over whether VA can override courts through rulemaking, and whether the process requirements that protect veterans have any teeth — is just getting started.

Stay in the fight. File your comment. Watch the Federal Circuit.

And don't mistake a pause for a surrender.

Take Action

The comment period on RIN 2900-AS49 is open through April 20, 2026.

Tell VA exactly how this standard would affect your life. The comment record matters — both for this rule and for any future attempt.

Watch the Federal Circuit. Ingram v. Collins, No. 23-1798, is still pending. Laffon v. Collins has been filed. Both cases will shape what VA can do next.

Read the full HadIt.com breakdown: VA Halts Enforcement — 48 Hours Later

Tbird has been running HadIt.com since 1997. This is her personal analysis and advocacy publication. Facts matter here — even when making arguments.

I use AI as a research and editing assistant — the same way I'd use a good reference book or a sharp editor. Every word published here is reviewed, verified, and approved by me. The perspective, accuracy, and editorial decisions are mine.