Historically, U.S. service members have been forbidden from suing the federal government for any harm experienced while on active duty, but a new bipartisan bill aims to change the rules for sexual assault survivors. The Military Sexual Trauma Accountability Act was introduced in the Senate last month by Sens. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., and John Kennedy, R-La. If passed, the legislation would allow active-duty service members who experienced military sexual trauma, including sexual assault and related misconduct, to bring claims against the U.S. government.
According to the Department of Defense, more than 8,000 sexual assault complaints were reported during the 2024 fiscal year. If the bill becomes law, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that approximately 120,000 successful claims could be filed over the next decade. The U.S. military has roughly 1.4 million active-duty service members.
Why Can't Active-Duty Service Members Usually Sue the Government?
The current legal precedent dates back to 1950, when the U.S. Supreme Court established the Feres doctrine. Feres v. United States combined three separate lawsuits. One focused on a soldier who died in army barracks in a preventable fire, while another concentrated on a service member who’d suffered severely due to medical negligence. The third involved a lieutenant who died in an aircraft crash. The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) allows private individuals to file claims against the government, but the Court ruled that active duty military personnel couldn’t file claims under the act in circumstances "where the injuries arise out of or are in the course of activity incident to service."
The Court had several explanations for the decision. First, eligible military members can receive disability benefits and compensation through the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), an option not available to the average civilian. Additionally, the relationship between service members and the government is federal, and introducing varying state tort laws could quickly become complicated. The Court also said that allowing service members to sue could disrupt their commitment to the government and undermine military discipline. While the Court can and does overturn legal precedent — think Brown v. Board of Education — Feres remains in effect.
More than 70 years after its introduction, the Feres doctrine remains highly controversial. Opponents argue that the doctrine shields institutions from accountability for negligence and leaves service members without needed recourse after they’ve been harmed. Additionally, the VA has long faced criticism for claim backlogs, administrative delays, and improperly denied claims, which can make it difficult for injured service members to receive the compensation they’re seeking. There’s also murkiness around what counts as an injury due to military service, with lower courts sometimes denying lawsuits that should’ve been allowed to proceed. Some say the doctrine is an example of judicial overreach.
When Has Congress Allowed Service Members to Sue?
The bill isn’t the first congressional effort to create sexual assault reform, and previous attempts have been successful. The 2020 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) allows service members to file claims if malpractice occurs at a Department of Defense (DoD) medical facility and results in injury or death. The law doesn’t allow service members to file lawsuits in traditional federal courts or opt for a jury trial, but they can obtain settlements through an administrative process. Claimants can also seek compensation for non-economic damages, like pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages are currently capped at $750,000.
The 2022 Camp Lejeune Justice Act similarly bypasses the Feres doctrine. Under the law, service members and veterans who were injured by toxic water exposure at the North Carolina military base were given two years to sue the government. Veterans first had to file a claim with the Department of the Navy. If their claim was denied or left unresolved, they could file a civil lawsuit after 180 days. While the law didn’t allow for punitive damages, veterans could seek compensation for non-economic losses. The law came as welcome news for service members who developed illnesses like cancer and Parkinson's disease after being stationed at Camp Lejeune.
What Is the Military Sexual Trauma Accountability Act?
The Military Sexual Trauma Accountability Act defines sexual misconduct as rape, sexual assault, aggravated or abusive sexual contact, sexual harassment, and the wrongful broadcast or distribution of intimate images. The act would create a five-year statute of limitations and let some survivors file claims within five years of the law's passing — recognizing that many survivors don’t disclose sexual assault immediately. Survivors often feel a sense of guilt or shame about what they’ve undergone and shy away from telling anyone what happened. It can take years for someone to decide to speak up, especially in an environment where they may fear retaliation.
Why Military Sexual Assault Often Goes Unreported
Military sexual assault presents unique reporting challenges because of the military's chain of command and close-knit culture. Someone in the military may worry about getting a fellow service member in trouble, and it’s even more complex if the perpetrator is higher in rank, given the power they exert. A sexual assault survivor may fear being unfairly demoted, losing security clearances, and even being reassigned to a different unit if they disclose misconduct. The stakes can be high, which is one reason that 70% to 80% of military sexual assaults aren’t reported to the government. Having a path to receive compensation for negligence could encourage more survivors to come forward.
After someone is accused of sexual assault in the military, they’re criminally investigated and, in some cases, the complaint leads to a court-martial, which is a formal military trial. Not every investigation results in a conviction. In cases that proceed to court-martial, the conviction rate is about 40%.
If enacted, the Military Sexual Trauma Accountability Act would give service members access to a civil process that’s already available in many other sexual assault cases. Unlike criminal prosecutions, civil lawsuits use a lower burden of proof. Even if a defendant is acquitted in a criminal case, a civil claim may still proceed because a plaintiff need only prove that it’s more likely than not that the assault occurred. For many survivors, pursuing a civil lawsuit provides an opportunity to seek accountability, regain a sense of control, and pursue compensation for the harm they experienced.
Institutional Accountability Extends Beyond the Military
While the proposed legislation focuses on military sexual trauma, the legal principles behind it extend well beyond the armed forces. Sexual abuse can occur in any institution where power imbalances, trust, and a lack of oversight allow misconduct to go unchecked. Hospitals, schools, churches, youth organizations, treatment centers, and other institutions all have a legal responsibility to take reasonable steps to protect the people in their care. When they ignore warning signs, fail to investigate complaints, or allow known abusers to continue harming others, they may face civil liability.
A civil lawsuit can’t undo what happened, but it can provide financial compensation, uncover evidence through the legal process, and encourage institutions to strengthen policies and safeguards that help prevent future abuse. Whether in the military or another organization, holding institutions accountable is one way survivors can seek justice as they move forward with their recovery.
