eBook The Supreme Court and Military Justice, 1st Edition

  • Jonathan Lurie
  • Published By:
  • ISBN-10: 1452276285
  • ISBN-13: 9781452276281
  • DDC: 343.73
  • Grade Level Range: 9th Grade - College Senior
  • 264 Pages | eBook
  • Original Copyright 2013 | Published/Released November 2013
  • This publication's content originally published in print form: 2013
  • Price:  Sign in for price



This book addresses the body of statutory and case law covering both the military and military conduct. Four chapters discuss the relationship between the Supreme Court and military justice, covering the Civil War era, World War II, the post-war period from 1956 to 1987, and developments since the September 11, 2001, attacks. Each chapter also includes a set of documents that shed light on these periods of U.S. history. Excerpts from key Supreme Court briefs and rulings are complemented by articles from the Army Times, the Armed Forces Journal, and mass media including the New York Times and The Nation. Incisive introductions to these documents explain the evolution of constitutional law and the ways in which federal and state statutes have lessened the effectiveness of both civilian control over the military and civilian judicial oversight.

Table of Contents

Front Cover.
Half Title Page.
Other Frontmatter.
Title Page.
Copyright Page.
Summary Contents.
1: The Supreme Court and Military Justice in the Civil War Era.
2: Debating the Validity of Naval Court-Martial in Attempted Desertion Case in Dynes v. Hoover, 1858.
3: Majority in Dynes v. Hoover Upholds Court-Martial Procedure.
4: Arguing for Right to Civilian Trial in Case of Arrest over Speech at Political Rally in Ex Parte Vallandigham, 1863.
5: Majority in Ex Parte Vallandigham Upholds Military Commission Procedure, 1864.
6: The Rights of the Citizen in Time of War: Arguments in Ex Parte Milligan, 1866.
7: Majority in Ex Parte Milligan Reject Suspension of Habeas Corpus, 1866.
8: Chief Justice Chase's Dissent in Ex Parte Milligan Argues That Congress Can Establish Military Commissions, 1866.
9: National Intelligencer on Trials of Citizens by Military Courts, December 25, 1866.
10: National Intelligencer: Milligan Decision a “Vindication of the Civil Institutions of the Country,” December 20, 1866.
11: Congress Has “the Power to Reconstruct the Supreme Court,” New York Herald, December 23, 1866.
12: Court Members “Have Devoted Themselves with Dignity,” National Intelligencer, December 31, 1866.
13: Court Used “Technical Narrowness and Harshness” in Deciding Milligan, New York Times, January 3, 1867.
14: The Supreme Court Must Avoid Ruling on the Basis of Political Partisanship, The Nation, January 10, 1867.
15: Milligan and the Defeated Southern States, Harper's Weekly, January 19, 1867.
16: The Supreme Court and Military Justice in the World War II Era, 1942–1946: Ex Parte Milligan—Revisited but Still Revered?.
17: Roosevelt Denies Certain Enemies Access to the Courts, July 2, 1942.
18: Roosevelt Establishes a Military Commission to Try Eight Captured German Saboteurs, July 2, 1942.
19: “A Good Chance to Go to Town with Democracy,” Saturday Review of Literature, August 8, 1942.
20: Majority in Ex Parte Quirin Upholds Use of Military Commission to Try Alleged German Saboteurs, October 29, 1942.
21: Majority Rules in In Re Yamashita that Military Officials, Not Courts, Should Review Decisions of Military Tribunals, 1946.
22: Justices Murphy and Rutledge Denounce Yamashita Ruling, 1946.
23: The Supreme Court and Military Justice after World War II, 1956–1987: The Odd Odysseys of Toth, O'Callahan, and Solorio, 1956–1987.
24: Majority Draws Distinction Between Civilian and Military Trials in Toth v. Quarles Decision, 1955.
25: Toth Decision Casts Doubt on Military's Ability to Try Former Prisoners of War in Korea, Army Times, November 12, 1955.
26: O'Callahan Lawyer Argues “No Reason” Client Can't Be Tried by Civilian Court, January 23, 1969.
27: Majority in O'Callahan v. Parker Limit Military Jurisdiction in Trials, Expanding Toth Ruling, 1969.
28: Justice Harlan's Dissent in O'Callahan Says Majority Ruling Fails to Set Standard for Permissible Court-Martial, 1969.
29: “The Supreme Court of the United States Drastically Changed Military Justice,” Army Times, June 11, 1969.
30: Problems Predicted as a Result of O'Callahan Decision, Army Times, June 18, 1969.
31: Defense Secretary Melvin Laird Wants Supreme Court Reversal on O'Callahan, Army Times, July 2, 1969.
32: Cartoon: “Latest Salute”.
33: Justice Harry Blackmun Says Supreme Court Will One Day Have to Consider Retroactivity of O'Callahan Ruling, February 11, 1971.
34: Justice Blackmun Looks at Issue of Military Trials in Light of Need for Military Discipline, Undated Memo.
35: Unanimous Court in Relford v. Commandant Rules Serviceman Properly Tried by Court-Martial, 1971.
36: Impact of O'Callahan Decision on Active and Former Servicemen, Air Force Times, July 11, 1973.
37: Majority in Solorio v. United States Rules Jurisdiction of Court-Martial Does Not Depend on Service Connection, 1987.
38: Justice Marshall's Dissent in Solorio Says Majority Shows Desire to Subject Service Members to Unrestrained Control of Military, 1987.
39: Solorio Decision Broadened the Jurisdiction of Military Courts, Navy Times, July 6, 1987.
40: Solorio Decision Restores Simplicity on Rules on Court-Martial Jurisdiction, Navy Times, July 13, 1987.
41: Justice Brennan Sees Presumption Against Military Jurisdiction in Off-Base Cases, Memo, February 27, 1987.
42: The Supreme Court and Military Justice after 9/11: The Ghost of Milligan Reappears Again.
43: Congress Adopts Authorization for Use of Military Force, September 18, 2001.
44: Proclamation by President George W. Bush on the Authorization for Use of Military Force, September 18, 2001.
45: Plurality in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld Rules Those Classified as Enemy Combatants Have the Right to Rebut Accusation, June 28, 2004.
46: Justice Scalia: Without Criminal Charges or Suspension of Writ, Hamdi Entitled to Habeas Corpus, June 28, 2004.
47: Settlement with U.S. Government Requires Hamdi to Leave the United States, Agree Not to Sue, September 17, 2004.
48: Majority in Rasul v. Bush Rule Courts Can Decide Whether Detainees at Guantánamo Lawfully Imprisoned, June 28, 2004.
49: Justice Kennedy's Concurrence in Rasul Calls for Federal Court Jurisdiction over Habeas Corpus Appeals, June 28, 2004.
50: Congress Acts to Prevent Habeas Corpus Petitions from Detainees at Guantánamo, December 30, 2005.
51: Majority in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld Rule Against Military Commissions Set Up to Try Guantánamo Detainees, June 29, 2006.
52: Praise for Supreme Court for Limiting Power to Try Guantánamo Detainees Before Military Tribunals, Armed Forces Journal, August 2006.
53: Criticism of Supreme Court for Applying Article 3 of the Geneva Convention to Hamdan Case, Armed Forces Journal, August 2006.
54: Congress Acts to Prevent Courts from Hearing Habeas Corpus Petitions from Those Deemed Unlawful Combatants, October 17, 2006.
55: Majority Rules Detainee Treatment Act Review Procedure Falls Short in Boumediene v. Bush Decision, June 12, 2008.