So the US v. Ali oral argument addressing the constitutionality of Art. 2(a)(10), UCMJ at the Army Court of Criminal Appeals should be concluded.  Anyone care to share thoughts?

UPDATE: Mark Sherman, one of AP’s SCOTUS reporters, has the first hearing coverage here. One confusing statement in the report. We’ll see if we can help them out.

UPDATE 2:  Here is NIMJ Executive Director Michelle Lindo McCluer’s synopsis of the arguments.

4 Responses to “Ali Oral Argument”

  1. Snuffy says:

    Ok NoMan- what’s the confusing part?
    .

  2. Ama Goste says:

    Is it the assertion that US citizens can’t be tried by court-martial?

  3. Mike "No Man" Navarre says:

    The Amas have it. I think he meant that civilians can’t be tried in the US, which is part of the authority that SecDef withheld. But since I don’t have the context of the whole cook example it is hard to tell.

  4. Ama Goste says:

    No Man, COL T’s cook scenario was about an American citizen who’s a civilian cook who commits a capital offense. I don’t know where this incident was supposed to have taken place, but I believe it was overseas.