This week at the Supremes:  There’s no anticipated SCOTUS military justice activity on my radar screen for the week.  The SG’s deadline for filing a response to the Neal Article 120 cert petition was Friday.  We’ll try to get a copy and post it.  (It isn’t on the SG’s website yet.)

This week at CAAF:  CAAF has completed its oral arguments for the term and released decisions in every argued case.  I’ve fallen way behind on my plan to post end o’ term stats.  I now hope to crunch numbers and post results no later than next weekend.

This week at the CCAs:  On Tuesday, NMCCA will hear oral argument in United States v. Fosler on this issue:  “WHETHER AN ARTICLE 134 CHARGE FAILS TO STATE AN OFFENSE IF THE TERMINAL ELEMENT IS NOT EXPRESSLY ALLEGED IN THE CHARGE.”

7 Responses to “This week in military justice”

  1. repost says:


  2. Late Bloomer says:

    Interesting article. From podunk Oklahoma to Wales. Now that’s a journey.

    Oddly, I don’t necessarily take issue with the “philosophy” of hacking (i.e. open flow and exchange of information). However, I do believe that information can be a weapon. And as with any weapon, we want to protect ourselves while utilizing it.

  3. Ciws70 says:

    Keep an eye out next week for the Jacobsen case out of Pearl Harbor. MJ could dismiss it for apparent or even actual UCI…not sure how it is going to shake out, but has been interesting to watch. Issue is MJ’s order to fund DC’s travel to scene of crime. GCMCA refused to comply with the order or appear in court to discuss when directed by MJ…

  4. Anonymous says:

    who’s advising that Commander??

    To ignore the judge’s order to show up in court is just basically asking for the case to be dismissed.

    For that matter, why not fund the travel?? What, was the crime scene on Mars?

  5. Ama Goste says:

    Sounds like a commander who’s not too keen on lawyers, so it probably doesn’t matter who’s advising.

  6. Weirick says:

    “Listen JAG, my version of the MCM don’t have no R.C.M. 701(e). So you should just shut your soup cooler.”

  7. Cheap Seats says:

    I’m guessing this commander doesn’t ever want another promotion. I’m curious as to what questions Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC) might have for the GCMCA in the confirmation process. As a Reserve Judge Advocate, Sen. Graham may actually want a hearing to ask the GCMCA some questions if ever nominated for another star. May wish to question him regarding the role of military judges, convening authorities, the rule of law, upholding justice, the appearance of legitimacy of military justice, etc. Without knowing all the facts in this case, looks like the GCMCA is setting himself up for trouble.