NIMJ has moved to file this amicus brief at CAAF in the Salyer case.  The brief’s opening is powerful (though, as I’ve acknowledged before, I’m far from an objective observer concerning this case):

From one perspective, if Judge Mori had just done what the government lawyers wanted, none of this would have had to happen.

If Judge Mori had just ruled the way the government lawyers asked, they never would have investigated his wife. If he had just given the instructions that they demanded, they never would have called his boss. If he had just ruled for the prosecution, instead of the defense, the government never would have tried to remove him. And none of the issues facing this Court would have ever arisen. Of course, had Judge Mori done any of those things, he would have violated the basic principle underlying all courts-martial: the necessity of independence.

The amicus brief is authored by Phil “My Liege” Cave, Judge Mathews the Greatest, and Kevin J. “No Known Nickname” Hejmanowski.

4 Responses to “NIMJ’s Salyer amicus”

  1. Phil Cave says:

    My Liege – got it.  :-)
    His Code 45 nickname is Kevin Longname.

  2. Charlie Gittins says:

    Nice work, men.

  3. publius-publicola says:


  4. Phil Cave says:

    PeePee, sorry, too common.  Fails the 45 test.