This article originally appeared here, at fairfaxtimes.com

Fairfax County resident and veteran John P. Sopko, 83, retired with a disability that began in 1972. However, when he requested reimbursement of real estate taxes, the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors denied him. 

Now, Sopko has a high-level ally: Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares, who filed an amicus brief last week in a lawsuit, Sopko v. Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, that the veteran filed against the Board of Supervisors.

The case was heard in Fairfax County Circuit Court on Monday, with the court docket noting: “Order entered” and “Settled Order Pending.”

In a statement, Miyares said he filed the brief to “defend the constitutional rights of disabled veterans in Virginia after Fairfax County refused to honor property tax exemptions promised to them under the Virginia Constitution.” 

“Fairfax County is trying to rewrite the rules, citing failed legislation and exploiting legal loopholes to deny a disabled veteran what the Constitution guarantees,” Miyares said. 

Chloe Smith, director of communications at the Office of the Attorney General, told the Fairfax County Times that the Office of the Attorney General has received “numerous reports that Mr. Sopko’s situation is not an isolated incident.” She said the reports indicate that Fairfax may have a “widespread practice of denying disabled veterans the full benefit of the real estate tax exemption for disabled veterans.” 

To Miyares, there is no confusion in this case. “The law is not only clear—it is binding. Bureaucratic red tape should never be weaponized to deny a disabled veteran the benefits he bled for. Mr. Sopko defended our constitutional rights, and now I will ensure the Commonwealth of Virginia defends his,” said Miyares. 

Miyares insisted that Fairfax County had violated the Virginia Constitution. In 2010, he said Virginians “overwhelmingly passed a constitutional amendment granting real property tax exemptions to veterans with a 100% service-connected, permanent, and total disability.” 

Miyares then explained that legislation had been passed that bolsters the constitutional amendment. “The General Assembly followed by passing implementing legislation that clearly entitles qualifying veterans to refunds of property taxes dating back to January 1, 2011,” the statement clarified. 

The brief argues that Fairfax County attempted to deny refunds based on “unrelated general tax statutes.” It reiterated that the attempt ignored the “plain language of Virginia’s Constitution and implementing laws.”

The brief also “rejects the idea that failed legislation—bills that never became law—should carry any weight in court.”  

In the filing, the Office of the Attorney General stated that the Commonwealth of Virginia is home to hundreds of thousands of veterans and numerous American military installations. Thus, it claims a “strong interest in ensuring that veterans receive the benefits to which they are entitled.” It continued that it has “actively defended” this “strong interest” in state and federal court. 

The Office of the Attorney General claimed that Virginia has deep-seated sympathy for veterans. 

“Consistent with Virginia’s long tradition of honoring its veterans, Virginia’s electorate in 2010 overwhelmingly voted to amend the Constitution to provide a real property tax exemption for disabled veterans,” the filing stated. 

“Plaintiff John P. Sopko, a veteran with a 100% service-connected disability, is entitled to this tax exemption. Yet despite the clear and specific language of the constitutional amendment, its implementing statute, and an Attorney General Opinion establishing Sopko’s entitlement to the exemption, Fairfax County has withheld from Sopko the benefits to which his service to and sacrifice for his country entitle him,” the filing expounded. 

“Virginia’s local governments should not be in the business of denying disabled veterans the benefits they have earned. The Commonwealth, therefore, files this brief amicus curiae in support of Sopko’s motion in limine to preclude Fairfax from relying on failed legislation to support its erroneous position,” it continued. 

The Office of the Attorney General emphasized that the “plain language” of the Virginia Constitution and Code§ 58.1-3219.5 establishes that Sopko is entitled to reimbursement of his real estate taxes. It then went on to continue that “no further legislation is necessary to achieve this result, and the General Assembly’s failure to enact proposed legislation related to the exemption is irrelevant and has no probative value.” 

“The statute’s import is plain, as the Attorney General already determined in 2017: the statute is ‘retroactive on its face’ such that once a veteran establishes his entitlement to the exemption, he ‘is entitled to enjoy that tax exemption, beginning on the date of the disability rating, including all prior years back to and including 2011,’ and the locality must refund him accordingly,” the filing explained. 

“Fairfax’s reliance on failed legislation is improper and should be barred. Failed legislation is irrelevant to interpreting enacted statutes and has no probative value. Instead, it risks confusion,” the filing argued.

The Office of the Attorney General said that developments in the case are currently “sealed by the Court,” so an update was not available before publication.

The Fairfax County Board of Supervisors and Sopko’s attorney did not respond for comment.