DOCSLIB.ORG

Gentlemen Under Fire: the U.S. Military and Conduct Unbecoming

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gentlemen Under Fire: the U.S. Military and Conduct Unbecoming Minnesota Journal of Law & Inequality Volume 26 Issue 1 Article 1 June 2008 Gentlemen under Fire: The U.S. Military and Conduct Unbecoming Elizabeth L. Hillman Follow this and additional works at: https://lawandinequality.org/ Recommended Citation Elizabeth L. Hillman, Gentlemen under Fire: The U.S. Military and Conduct Unbecoming, 26(1) LAW & INEQ. 1 (2008). Available at: https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/lawineq/vol26/iss1/1 Minnesota Journal of Law & Inequality is published by the University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing. Gentlemen Under Fire: The U.S. Military and "Conduct Unbecoming" Elizabeth L. Hillmant Introduction ..................................................................................1 I. Creating an Officer Class ..................................................10 A. "A Scandalous and Infamous" Manner ...................... 11 B. The "Military Art" and American Gentility .............. 12 C. Continental Army Prosecutions .................................15 II. Building a Profession .........................................................17 A. Colonel Winthrop's Definition ...................................18 B. "A Stable Fraternity" ................................................. 19 C. Old Army Prosecutions ..............................................25 III. Defending a Standing Army ..............................................27 A. "As a Court-Martial May Direct". ............................. 27 B. Democratization and its Discontents ........................ 33 C. Cold War Prosecutions ..............................................36 IV. Meeting the Proliferating Threats ...................................42 A. The Gentlewoman Question .......................................42 B. Post-Cold War Diversity and Operations .................. 46 C. Recent Prosecutions ...................................................51 C onclusion ..................................................................................56 Introduction When it comes to military crime, the officer corps of the United States military occupies a space both protected and vulnerable. Military justice itself is "officers' country,"' a venue in which officers not only control criminal investigation and t. Professor of Law, Rutgers School of Law-Camden. Versions of this Article have been read and critiqued by many generous scholars and friends. For their help, I am especially grateful to my colleagues at Rutgers-Camden, to audiences at the University of Pennsylvania, the University of California, Davis, and Seton Hall law schools, to the New York LGBTQ law faculty workshop, and to Nancy F. Cott, Ariela Dubler, Alice K. Dueker, William N. Eskridge, Jr., Eugene R. Fidell, Katherine Franke, Kris Franklin, Suzanne Goldberg, Robert W. Gordon, Hendrik Hartog, Nan Hunter, Alice Kaplan, Linda K. Kerber, Jean Marie Lutes, Reva B. Siegel, Edward Stein, and Barbara Welke. All errors and oversights are my own. 1. "Officers' country" technically refers to places on a ship where enlisted personnel are not allowed. See Kristin K. Heimark, Sexual Harassment in the United States Navy: A New Pairof Glasses, 44 NAVAL L. REV. 223, 235 n.39 (1997). Law and Inequality [Vol. 26:1 prosecution but also serve as judge and jury. 2 Yet officers themselves are rarely court-martialed. 3 Many soldiers believe that officers are insulated against prosecution for wrongdoing by the political expediency of pushing blame to the lowest possible level, where it does not reflect as poorly on the judgment of military and civilian leaders. 4 Others attribute the low number of officer courts-martial to the generally good behavior of officers 5 or to the legal and political barriers to punishing individuals for acts that they did not themselves commit, notwithstanding the doctrine of command responsibility, which makes officers liable for crimes that they knew, or should have known, were being committed under their command. 6 The privilege of rank, of course, does not protect all officers equally or absolutely, for lesser officers risk 2. See Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), art. 15, 10 U.S.C. § 825(a) (2000). Enlisted persons can, however, serve on a court-martial panel (the correlate of a civilian jury) if the accused is an enlistee and personally requests enlisted members. See § 825(c). 3. See, e.g., ELIZABETH LUTES HILLMAN, DEFENDING AMERICA: MILITARY CULTURE AND THE COLD WAR COURT-MARTIAL 109-14 (2005) (discussing reasons why officers have rarely been court-martialed); John Sifton, United States Military and Central Intelligence Agency Personnel Abroad: Plugging the Prosecutorial Gaps, 43 HARv. J. ON LEGIS. 487, 490 (2006) (noting that very few officers have been court-martialed and that the cases in which officers have been court-martialed have involved officers' direct participation in crimes). For what may be the exception that proves the rule, see Chelsea J. Carter, 2 Marines to Face Courts- Martial in Haditha Killings, WASH. POST, Oct. 20, 2007, at A2 (reporting the pending court-martial of Lt. Col. Jeffrey R. Chessani for dereliction and disobedience). 4. See, e.g., Jonathan Peterson, Higher Officials Unlikely to Be Tried, L.A. TIMES, Jan. 16, 2005, at A24 (describing the difficulty of prosecuting high-ranking officials in the Abu Ghraib scandal); Sam Provance, The American Ghosts of Abu Ghraib, CONSORTIUMNEWS (Mar. 27, 2007), http://www.consortiumnews.com/ 2007/032607b.html (last visited Nov. 1, 2007) (reporting that the Pentagon punished an officer who testified about crimes at Abu Ghraib and arguing that the Pentagon blamed only low-level personnel). See generally GORDON A. GINSBURG, THE LAVELLE CASE: CRISIS IN INTEGRITY (1974) (on file with author) (describing the impact of politics on the investigation of an Army general for his role in the unauthorized bombing of North Vietnam); Keithe E. Nelson, Conduct Expected of an Officer and a Gentleman: Ambiguity, 12 A.F. JAG L. REV. 124, 124 (1970) ("The disposition of cases involving officer misconduct has been a continuing problem in the Armed Forces of the United States."). 5. See, e.g., ROBERT BUZZANO, MASTERS OF WAR: MILITARY DISSENT AND POLITICS IN THE VIETNAM ERA (1996) (asserting that the armed forces are full of politically savvy officers); HILLMAN, supra note 3, at 114 (discussing the ability of high-ranking officers to work within the system to avoid court-martial). 6. See In re Yamashita, 327 U.S. 1, 15 (1946) (holding that officers bear some responsibility for acts of their subordinates); U.S. ARMY, FIELD MANUAL 27-10: THE LAW OF LAND WARFARE 501 (1956); Maj. Michael E. Smidt, Yamashita, Medina, and Beyond: Command Responsibility in Contemporary Military Operations, 164 MIL. L. REV. 155 (2000) (discussing the doctrine of command responsibility). 2008] GENTLEMEN UNDER FIRE being sacrificed for those higher up the chain of command. 7 Officers who escape court-martial can be punished through sub- criminal measures, such as administrative sanction, demotion, or career-derailing reassignments.8 But the perception that high- ranking officers are rarely disciplined and almost never criminally prosecuted is so common partly because it is true. 9 Although some of the best-known courts-martial in United States history involve officers, 10 very few officers have faced court-martial, even when soldiers under their command have been tried and convicted for offenses related to their military duties. 1 The aftermath of a recent high-profile military scandal, the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib in 2003, provides an example of the disparity of punishment between officers and enlistees. After exhaustive investigations, public fallout, and internal recriminations, eleven enlistees were court-martialed, convicted, and sentenced for their conduct at Abu Ghraib.12 Their sentences 7. See, e.g., Dexter Filkins, What the War Did to Colonel Sassaman, N.Y. TIMES, Oct. 23, 2005, (Magazine), at 52 (describing the fate of Nathan Sassaman, another much-celebrated Army lieutenant colonel, who was reprimanded by the Army-but not court-martialed-after his men forced two Iraqis who had allegedly violated curfew to jump into a river as punishment); Scott Gold, 5 California Guardsmen Face Charges of Abusing Iraqis, L.A. TIMES, Aug. 23, 2005, at Al (explaining that five soldiers, three of whom were sergeants, faced courts-martial for abusing Iraqi detainees while their commander Lt. Col. Patrick Frey was simply suspended from duty). 8. See, e.g., HILLMAN, supra note 3, at 114 (noting the availability of administrative discharges and nonjudicial punishment for officers). In the past, officers could face a special punishment that delayed their promotions. See Eugene R. Fidell & Jay M. Fidell, Loss of Numbers, 48 NAVAL L. REV. 194 (2001) (assessing the impact of the abolition of "loss of numbers," an officers-only punishment in the sea services that was eliminated in 1999, on the use of the general court-martial in cases involving naval officers). 9. HILLMAN supra note 3, at 109-14. 10. These include the 1865 trial of Capt. Henry Wirz for his conduct as commander of the notorious Civil War prison in Andersonville, Georgia, the 1925 trial of Gen. Billy Mitchell for insubordination for his stubborn advocacy of air power, and the 1970 trial of Army Lt. William L. Calley, Jr. for his role in the My Lai massacre in Vietnam. See, e.g., ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ, AMERICA ON TRIAL: INSIDE THE LEGAL BATTLES THAT TRANSFORMED THE NATION (2004) (discussing the courts-martial of Wirz, Mitchell, and Calley in a survey of great American trials). 11.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Examining the Civil-Military Divide Through New (Institutional) Lenses: the Influence of the Supreme Court
    University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Doctoral Dissertations Dissertations and Theses November 2016 Examining the Civil-Military Divide Through New (Institutional) Lenses: The Influence of the Supreme Court Allen Linken University of Massachusetts Amherst Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_2 Part of the American Politics Commons, Courts Commons, Military and Veterans Studies Commons, Military, War, and Peace Commons, Other Legal Studies Commons, Public Law and Legal Theory Commons, and the Supreme Court of the United States Commons Recommended Citation Linken, Allen, "Examining the Civil-Military Divide Through New (Institutional) Lenses: The Influence of the Supreme Court" (2016). Doctoral Dissertations. 759. https://doi.org/10.7275/8980257.0 https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_2/759 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Dissertations and Theses at ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EXAMINING THE CIVIL-MILITARY DIVIDE THROUGH NEW (INSTITUTIONAL) LENSES: THE INFLUENCE OF THE SUPREME COURT A Dissertation Presented by ALLEN E. LINKEN Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts Amherst in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY September 2016 Political Science © Copyright by Allen E. Linken 2016 All Rights Reserved EXAMINING THE CIVIL-MILITARY DIVIDE THROUGH NEW (INSTITUTIONAL) LENSES: THE INFLUENCE OF THE SUPREME COURT A Dissertation Presented by ALLEN E. LINKEN Approved as to style and content by: ________________________________ John Brigham, Chair ________________________________ Jane E.
    [Show full text]
  • Moves to Amend HF No. 752 As Follows:​ Delete Everything After the Enacting Clause and Insert
    03/23/21 02:45 pm ​ HOUSE RESEARCH JD/RK H0752DE3​ 1.1 .................... moves to amend H.F. No. 752 as follows:​ 1.2 Delete everything after the enacting clause and insert:​ 1.3 "ARTICLE 1​ 1.4 APPROPRIATIONS​ 1.5 Section 1. STATE GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS.​ 1.6 The sums shown in the columns marked "Appropriations" are appropriated to the agencies​ 1.7 and for the purposes specified in this article. The appropriations are from the general fund,​ 1.8 or another named fund, and are available for the fiscal years indicated for each purpose.​ 1.9 The figures "2022" and "2023" used in this article mean that the appropriations listed under​ 1.10 them are available for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2022, or June 30, 2023, respectively.​ 1.11 "The first year" is fiscal year 2022. "The second year" is fiscal year 2023. "The biennium"​ 1.12 is fiscal years 2022 and 2023.​ 1.13 APPROPRIATIONS​ 1.14 Available for the Year​ 1.15 Ending June 30​ 1.16 2022​ 2023​ 1.17 Sec. 2. MILITARY AFFAIRS​ 1.18 Subdivision 1. Total Appropriation​ $​ 24,393,000​ $​ 24,589,000​ 1.19 The amounts that may be spent for each​ 1.20 purpose are specified in the following​ 1.21 subdivisions.​ Article 1 Sec. 2.​ 1​ 03/23/21 02:45 pm ​ HOUSE RESEARCH JD/RK H0752DE3​ 2.1 Subd. 2. Maintenance of Training Facilities​ 9,772,000​ 9,772,000​ 2.2 Subd. 3. General Support​ 3,507,000​ 3,633,000​ 2.3 Subd. 4. Enlistment Incentives​ 11,114,000​ 11,114,000​ 2.4 The appropriations in this subdivision are​ 2.5 available until June 30, 2025, except that any​ 2.6 unspent amounts allocated to a program​ 2.7 otherwise supported by this appropriation are​ 2.8 canceled to the general fund upon receipt of​ 2.9 federal funds in the same amount to support​ 2.10 administration of that program.​ 2.11 If the amount for fiscal year 2022 is​ 2.12 insufficient, the amount for 2023 is available​ 2.13 in fiscal year 2022.
    [Show full text]
  • Web Apr 06.Qxp
    On-Line version TIP OF THE SPEAR Departments Global War On Terrorism Page 4 Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command Page 18 Naval Special Warfare Command Page 21 Air Force Special Operations Command Page 24 U.S. Army Special Operations Command Page 28 Headquarters USSOCOM Page 30 Special Operations Forces History Page 34 Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command historic activation Gen. Doug Brown, commander, U.S. Special Operations Command, passes the MARSOC flag to Brig. Gen. Dennis Hejlik, MARSOC commander, during a ceremony at Camp Lejune, N.C., Feb. 24. Photo by Tech. Sgt. Jim Moser. Tip of the Spear Gen. Doug Brown Capt. Joseph Coslett This is a U.S. Special Operations Command publication. Contents are Commander, USSOCOM Chief, Command Information not necessarily the official views of, or endorsed by, the U.S. Government, Department of Defense or USSOCOM. The content is CSM Thomas Smith Mike Bottoms edited, prepared and provided by the USSOCOM Public Affairs Office, Command Sergeant Major Editor 7701 Tampa Point Blvd., MacDill AFB, Fla., 33621, phone (813) 828- 2875, DSN 299-2875. E-mail the editor via unclassified network at Col. Samuel T. Taylor III Tech. Sgt. Jim Moser [email protected]. The editor of the Tip of the Spear reserves Public Affairs Officer Editor the right to edit all copy presented for publication. Front cover: Marines run out of cover during a short firefight in Ar Ramadi, Iraq. The foot patrol was attacked by a unknown sniper. Courtesy photo by Maurizio Gambarini, Deutsche Press Agentur. Tip of the Spear 2 Highlights Special Forces trained Iraqi counter terrorism unit hostage rescue mission a success, page 7 SF Soldier awarded Silver Star for heroic actions in Afghan battle, page 14 20th Special Operations Squadron celebrates 30th anniversary, page 24 Tip of the Spear 3 GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM Interview with Gen.
    [Show full text]
  • Constitutional Law—Uniform Code of Military Justice—General Article Void for Vagueness?
    Nebraska Law Review Volume 34 Issue 3 Article 8 1955 Constitutional Law—Uniform Code of Military Justice—General Article Void for Vagueness? James W. Hewitt University of Nebraska College of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr Recommended Citation James W. Hewitt, Constitutional Law—Uniform Code of Military Justice—General Article Void for Vagueness?, 34 Neb. L. Rev. 518 (1954) Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol34/iss3/8 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law, College of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Nebraska Law Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. 518 NEBRASKA LAW REVIEW CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE-GENERAL ARTICLE VOID FOR VAGUENESS.? Much has been said or written about the rights of servicemen under the new Uniform Code of Military Justice,1 which is the source of American written military law. Some of the major criticisms of military law have been that it is too harsh, too vague, and too careless of the right to due process of law. A large por­ tion of this criticism has been leveled at Article 134,2 the general, catch-all article of the Code. Article 134 provides: 3~ Alabama. Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, l\Iaine, l\Iaryland, l\Iasschusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and Vermont. South Carolina has the privilege by case decision. See note 4 supra. 1 64 Stat. 107 <1950l, 50 U.S.C. §§ 551-736 (1952).
    [Show full text]
  • GOOD ORDER and DISCIPLINE Second Quarter, Fiscal Year 2019 This Publishes to the Coast Guard Community a Summary of Disciplinary
    GOOD ORDER AND DISCIPLINE Second Quarter, Fiscal Year 2019 This publishes to the Coast Guard community a summary of disciplinary and administrative actions taken when Coast Guard military members or civilian employees failed to uphold the high ethical, moral, and professional standards we share as members of the Coast Guard. Even though the military and civilian systems are separate, with different procedures, rights, and purposes, the underlying values remain the same. Actions from both systems are included to inform the Coast Guard community of administrative and criminal enforcement actions. The following brief descriptions of offenses committed and punishments awarded are the result of Coast Guard general, special, and summary courts-martial and selected military and civilian disciplinary actions taken service-wide during the second quarter of Fiscal Year 2019. General and special courts-martial findings of guilt are federal criminal convictions; other disciplinary actions are non-judicial or administrative in nature. When appropriate, actions taken as a result of civil rights complaints are also described. Details of the circumstances surrounding most actions are limited to keep this summary to a manageable size and to protect victim privacy. Direct comparison of cases should not be made because there are many variables involved in arriving at the resulting action. The circumstances surrounding each case are different, and disciplinary or remedial action taken is dependent upon the particular facts and varying degrees of extenuation and mitigation. In many cases, further separation or other administrative action may be pending. Note: A court-martial sentence may be accompanied by other administrative action. A case falling under more than one of the categories below has been listed only once and placed under the category considered most severe in its consequences unless otherwise noted.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 4 Issue 1 Fall/Winter 2015
    TM VOLUME 4 ISSUE 1 FALL/WINTER 2015 National Security Law Journal George Mason University School of Law 3301 Fairfax Drive Arlington, VA 22201 www.nslj.org © 2015 National Security Law Journal. All rights reserved. Library of Congress Publication Data (Serial) National Security Law Journal. Arlington, Va. : National Security Law Journal, 2013- K14 .N18 ISSN: 2373-8464 Variant title: NSLJ National security—Law and legislation—Periodicals LC control no. 2014202997 (http://lccn.loc.gov/2014202997) Past issues available in print at the Law Library Reading Room of the Library of Congress (Madison, LM201). VOLUME 4, ISSUE 1 (FALL/WINTER 2015) ISBN-13: 978-1523203987 ISBN-10: 1523203986 ARTICLES PLANNING FOR CHANGE: BUILDING A FRAMEWORK TO PREDICT FUTURE CHANGES TO THE FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE ACT Patrick Walsh QUANTUM LAWMAKING: HOW NATIONAL SECURITY LAW HAPPENS WHEN WE’RE NOT LOOKING Jesse Medlong COMMENTS TERROR IN MEXICO: WHY DESIGNATING MEXICAN CARTELS AS TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS EASES PROSECUTION OF DRUG TRAFFICKERS UNDER THE NARCOTERRORISM STATUTE Stephen R. Jackson CYBERSPACE: THE 21ST-CENTURY BATTLEFIELD EXPOSING SOLDIERS, SAILORS, AIRMEN, AND MARINES TO POTENTIAL CIVIL LIABILITIES Molly Picard VOLUME 4 FALL/WINTER 2015 ISSUE 1 PUBLISHED BY GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW Cite as 4 NAT’L SEC. L.J. ___ (2015). The National Security Law Journal (“NSLJ”) is a student-edited legal periodical published twice annually at George Mason University School of Law in Arlington, Virginia. We print timely, insightful scholarship on pressing matters that further the dynamic field of national security law, including topics relating to foreign affairs, homeland security, intelligence, and national defense. Visit our website at www.nslj.org to read our issues online, purchase the print edition, submit an article, learn about our upcoming events, or sign up for our e-mail newsletter.
    [Show full text]
  • Pub. L. 108–136, Div. A, Title V, §509(A)
    § 777a TITLE 10—ARMED FORCES Page 384 Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 590; Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, for a period of up to 14 days before assuming the title V, § 509(a), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1458; Pub. duties of a position for which the higher grade is L. 108–375, div. A, title V, § 503, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 authorized. An officer who is so authorized to Stat. 1875; Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title V, wear the insignia of a higher grade is said to be §§ 503(c), 504, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3226; Pub. L. ‘‘frocked’’ to that grade. 111–383, div. A, title V, § 505(b), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 (b) RESTRICTIONS.—An officer may not be au- Stat. 4210.) thorized to wear the insignia for a grade as de- scribed in subsection (a) unless— AMENDMENTS (1) the Senate has given its advice and con- 2011—Subsec. (b)(3)(B). Pub. L. 111–383 struck out sent to the appointment of the officer to that ‘‘and a period of 30 days has elapsed after the date of grade; the notification’’ after ‘‘grade’’. 2006—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 109–163, § 503(c), inserted ‘‘in (2) the officer has received orders to serve in a grade below the grade of major general or, in the case a position outside the military department of of the Navy, rear admiral,’’ after ‘‘An officer’’ in first that officer for which that grade is authorized; sentence. (3) the Secretary of Defense (or a civilian of- Subsec. (d)(1).
    [Show full text]
  • Military Courts and Article III
    Military Courts and Article III STEPHEN I. VLADECK* TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .......................................... 934 I. MILITARY JUSTICE AND ARTICLE III: ORIGINS AND CASE LAW ...... 939 A. A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO U.S. MILITARY COURTS ........... 941 1. Courts-Martial ............................... 941 2. Military Commissions ......................... 945 B. THE NORMATIVE JUSTIFICATIONS FOR MILITARY JUSTICE ....... 948 C. THE SUPREME COURT’S CONSTITUTIONAL DEFENSE OF COURTS-MARTIAL ................................. 951 D. THE SUPREME COURT’S CONSTITUTIONAL DEFENSE OF MILITARY COMMISSIONS .................................... 957 II. RECENT EXPANSIONS TO MILITARY JURISDICTION ............... 961 A. SOLORIO AND THE SERVICE-CONNECTION TEST .............. 962 B. ALI AND CHIEF JUDGE BAKER’S BLURRING OF SOLORIO’S BRIGHT LINE .......................................... 963 C. THE MCA AND THE “U.S. COMMON LAW OF WAR” ............ 965 D. ARTICLE III AND THE CIVILIANIZATION OF MILITARY JURISDICTION .................................... 966 E. RECONCILING THE MILITARY EXCEPTION WITH CIVILIANIZATION .................................. 968 * Professor of Law, American University Washington College of Law. © 2015, Stephen I. Vladeck. For helpful discussions and feedback, I owe deep thanks to Zack Clopton, Jen Daskal, Mike Dorf, Gene Fidell, Barry Friedman, Amanda Frost, Dave Glazier, David Golove, Tara Leigh Grove, Ed Hartnett, Harold Koh, Marty Lederman, Peter Margulies, Jim Pfander, Zach Price, Judith Resnik, Gabor Rona, Carlos Va´zquez, Adam Zimmerman, students in my Fall 2013 seminar on military courts, participants in the Hauser Globalization Colloquium at NYU and Northwestern’s Public Law Colloquium, and colleagues in faculty workshops at Cardozo, Cornell, DePaul, FIU, Hastings, Loyola, Rutgers-Camden, and Stanford. Thanks also to Cynthia Anderson, Gabe Auteri, Gal Bruck, Caitlin Marchand, and Pasha Sternberg for research assistance; and to Dean Claudio Grossman for his generous and unstinting support of this project.
    [Show full text]
  • The Abu Ghraib Convictions: a Miscarriage of Justice
    Buffalo Public Interest Law Journal Volume 32 Article 4 9-1-2013 The Abu Ghraib Convictions: A Miscarriage of Justice Robert Bejesky Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/bpilj Part of the Human Rights Law Commons, and the Military, War, and Peace Commons Recommended Citation Robert Bejesky, The Abu Ghraib Convictions: A Miscarriage of Justice, 32 Buff. Envtl. L.J. 103 (2013). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/bpilj/vol32/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at Digital Commons @ University at Buffalo School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Buffalo Public Interest Law Journal by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ University at Buffalo School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE ABU GHRAIB CONVICTIONS: A MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE ROBERT BEJESKYt I. INTRODUCTION ..................... ..... 104 II. IRAQI DETENTIONS ...............................107 A. Dragnet Detentions During the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq.........................107 B. Legal Authority to Detain .............. ..... 111 C. The Abuse at Abu Ghraib .................... 116 D. Chain of Command at Abu Ghraib ..... ........ 119 III. BASIS FOR CRIMINAL CULPABILITY ..... ..... 138 A. Chain of Command ....................... 138 B. Systemic Influences ....................... 140 C. Reduced Rights of Military Personnel and Obedience to Authority ................ ..... 143 D. Interrogator Directives ................ ....
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 105 CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 105 CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION Vol. 144 WASHINGTON, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 1998 No. 11 House of Representatives The House met at 10 a.m. Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I object Herger Markey Redmond The Reverend Ronald F. Christian, Hill Martinez Regula to the vote on the ground that a Hinojosa Mascara Reyes Director, Lutheran Social Services of quorum is not present and make the Hobson Matsui Riley Fairfax, VA, offered the following pray- point of order that a quorum is not Hoekstra McCarthy (MO) Rivers er: present. Holden McCarthy (NY) Rodriguez Almighty God, Your glory is made Hooley McCollum Roemer The SPEAKER. Evidently a quorum Horn McCrery Rogan known in the heavens, and the fir- is not present. Hostettler McGovern Rogers mament declares Your handiwork. The Sergeant at Arms will notify ab- Houghton McHale Rohrabacher Hoyer McHugh Ros-Lehtinen With the signs of Your creative good- sent Members. ness all about us, we must acknowledge Hulshof McInnis Rothman The vote was taken by electronic de- Hutchinson McIntosh Roukema Your presence in our world, through vice, and there wereÐyeas 353, nays 43, Inglis McIntyre Roybal-Allard Your people, and within us all. answered ``present'' 1, not voting 33, as Istook McKeon Royce So, therefore, we pray for Your Jackson (IL) McKinney Ryun follows: mercy when our ways are stubborn or Jackson-Lee Meehan Sabo [Roll No. 14] (TX) Meek (FL) Salmon uncompromising and not at all akin to Jefferson Meeks (NY) Sanchez Your desires.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Impediments to Service: Women in the Military and the Rule of Law
    08__MURNANE.DOC 6/18/2007 3:03 PM LEGAL IMPEDIMENTS TO SERVICE: WOMEN IN THE MILITARY AND THE RULE OF LAW LINDA STRITE MURNANE* PREAMBLE Since our nation’s birth, women have been engaged in the national defense in various ways. This article will examine the legal impediments to service by women in the United States military. This brings to light an interesting assessment of the meaning of the term “Rule of Law,” as the legal exclusions barring women from service, establishing barriers to equality and creating a type of legal glass ceiling to preclude promotion, all fell within the then-existing Rule of Law in the United States. Finally, this article looks at the remaining barriers to women in the military and reasons to open all fields and all opportunities to women in today’s military. I. THE CONCEPT OF THE RULE OF LAW Albert Venn Dicey, in “Law of the Constitution,” identified three principles which establish the Rule of Law: (1) the absolute supremacy or predominance of regular law as opposed to the influence of arbitrary power; (2) equality before the law or the equal subjection of all classes to the ordinary law of the land administered by the ordinary courts; and (3) the law of the constitution is a consequence of the rights of individuals as defined and enforced by the courts.1 This concept of the Rule of Law has existed since the beginning of the nation, most famously reflected in the writings of John Adams in drafting the * Colonel, USAF, Ret. The author acknowledges with gratitude the research assistance of Vega Iodice, intern at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and lawyer apprentice at the Iodice Law Firm in Naples, Italy, in the preparation of this article.
    [Show full text]
  • Extensions of Remarks E1399 EXTENSIONS of REMARKS
    July 13, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E1399 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS AMENDING PUBLIC HEALTH SERV- CONGRATULATING THE MENTAL members volunteer and maintain the expense ICE ACT WITH RESPECT TO NA- HEALTH CENTER OF CHAMPAIGN of the Hampshire County Library. In 1926, the TIONAL FOUNDATION FOR THE COUNTY ON ITS 50TH ANNIVER- auxiliary assisted the Legion in designing an CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL SARY honor roll plaque for the World War I service- AND PREVENTION men of Hampshire County. HON. TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON Post No. 137 has an active membership of OF ILLINOIS 400 in Capon Bridge, WV. Post Commander SPEECH OF Bob Brasher is assisted by President Sally IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Reid and Larry LaFollette, head of the Sons of HON. DANNY K. DAVIS Thursday, July 13, 2006 the Legion group. OF ILLINOIS Mr. JOHNSON of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I rise Each of these organizations provides a today in honor of the Mental Health Center of venue for fellowship, volunteerism, and patriot- IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Champaign County on the celebration of its ism. The service each member has given to Tuesday, July 11, 2006 50th anniversary. their Nation and community shall be forever The Champaign County Mental Health Clinic cherished and represented. Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, Benjamin opened its doors 50 years ago as a program f Disraeli once exclaimed, ‘‘The health of the of the Champaign County Mental Health Soci- PENCE CALLS ON CONGRESS TO ety. On July 22, 1968, the Mental Health Cen- people is really the foundation upon which all STAND FOR THE SANCTITY OF ter became incorporated and changed its their happiness and all their powers as a state LIFE depend.’’ name to the Mental Health Center of Cham- paign County.
    [Show full text]