Soldier Can Sue Government Contractor For War Injuries, Supreme Court Says
✨ AI Summary
🔊 جاري الاستماع
BreakingBusinessSoldier Can Sue Government Contractor For War Injuries, Supreme Court SaysByMary Whitfill Roeloffs,Forbes Staff. Mary Roeloffs is a Forbes breaking news reporter covering pop culture.Follow AuthorApr 22, 2026, 12:02pm EDT--:-- / --:--This voice experience is generated by AI. Learn more.This voice experience is generated by AI. Learn more.ToplineThe Supreme Court has cleared the way for a veteran who was gravely injured by a suicide bomber in Afghanistan to sue the U.S. government contractor that employed the bomber, a case that could pave the way for soldiers hurt in combat zones to seek legal recourse. Flowers adorn a garden in front of the U.S. Supreme Court building on March 31, 2026. Getty ImagesKey FactsIn 2016, Army Spc. Winston Hencely stopped a man who was walking toward a Veterans Day 5K race at the U.S. air base in Bagram, Afghanistan, when the man detonated a suicide vest, killing five people and wounding more than a dozen others. Hencely, 20 at the time, was hailed by the Army as likely having prevented “a far greater tragedy” and was left partially paralyzed with a fractured skull and traumatic brain injury. The suicide bomber, a Taliban operative named Ahmad Nayeb, was working for the Texas-based Fluor Corporation as a military contractor after having been approved as a local hire by the military. An Army investigation into the incident deemed Fluor was primarily responsible for the attack because it did not properly supervise Nayeb, failed to impose adequate disciplinary measures despite several previous fireable offenses and did not properly enforce security measures at the base, which allowed him to "go undetected" for nearly an hour before the attack. Hencely sued Fluor in federal court, but the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court ruled military contractors were protected from prosecution, just like the federal government. In writing for the majority, Justice Clarence Thomas on Wednesday disagreed with the Fourth Circuit decision, a...





