Military medics taking command?

[Bricker]

@clairobscur

Hijack : does this mean that Congress can overturn courts’ sentences???

The effect of Congress’s private bill was to overturn the court-martial’s decision. As a general principle, the President has the authority to pardon offenses against the United States. Congress can quasi-pardon by simply amending the law, but that would apply to everyone that broke it. In a private relief bill, Congress can declare that a particular law’s effects do not apply to a particular person.

@Raguleader

I’d imagine it probably works differently for military courts than it would for regular courts. Actually, this brings up a couple questions in my head:

The military is part of the executive branch of the government, right?

The courts are of course part of the judicial branch of the government…

so where do the military courts fit? Are they part of the judicial branch? Do they exist in their own judicial pocket within the military in the executive branch?

The military courts are part of the judicial branch. Appeals from the verdict of a court martial are heard by the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, and from there to the Supreme Court.

[Jurph]

@flurb

Are there really such things as “courtesy officers” in the American military? I take that to mean someone given the title and trappings but without any of the authority or responsibilities typically associated with the rank. Most of the (admittedly limited in number) officers I’ve known would be pretty incensed to be told that their title was a “courtesy”.

If they hold officer rank in the Armed Forces (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps) they are real officers, period. If they hold a commission in the three “uniformed” services (Public Health Service, Coast Guard, NOAA Commissioned Corps) you could argue that their rank is “courtesy”.

However, I am an Air Force Captain (O-3) working in an office with a NOAA Captain (O-6) and you better believe I call him “sir”. He is my boss’s boss, and that’s that.

[Jurph]

Monty is of course correct that the military are a co-equal subset of the seven uniformed services – when I say three I mean three (non-military) uniformed services. Anyhow: we salute the rank and not the man.

[Monty]

@Jurph

If they hold a commission in the three “uniformed” services (Public Health Service, Coast Guard, NOAA Commissioned Corps) you could argue that their rank is “courtesy”.

You would then be incorrect in your argument. There is no ambiguitiy about the status of the Coast Guard (one of the Armed Forces), or the PHS and the NOAA (both Uniformed Services).

[robby]

@Sal Ammoniac

Are you sure about supply officers? I know they go to sea, and wouldn’t they have had typical Navy training? I’d be surprised if they were outside the chain of command.

Supply Officers do go to sea, and if they are assigned to a submarine, they attend the Submarine Officer Basic Course (SOBC) along with the line officers.

They do stand watches, but the most senior watch they ever stand is Diving Officer of the Watch (normally a watch stood by the most senior enlisted men). In battle stations, we had a supply officer handle the Geo Plot, which is normally a battle station watch stood by a junior line officer.

Nevertheless, they are still not eligible for command at sea as they are not line officers. Supply Officers are not even eligible to qualify as Officer of the Deck for submarines.

[Billdo]

@Bricker

The military courts are part of the judicial branch. Appeals from the verdict of a court martial are heard by the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, and from there to the Supreme Court.

I have to disagree with this. The U.S. military court system is an Article I (Congressionally established) court system (see, e.g. 10 USC 941), and thus part of the executive branch. The statute that permitted the US Supreme Court review decisions of the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, 28 USC 1259, was only adopted in 1983.

[Elendil_s_Heir]

@Bricker

William S. Cox. Cox, a 21 year-old Acting Third Lieutenant, was serving on USS Chesapeake during the War of 1812. In June of 1813, his ship engaged the British frigate HMS Shannon. Cox carried the mortally wounded ship’s captain below decks, not aware that all of the senior officers had become casualties and that command of the ship had fallen to him. In his absence, the British boarded Chesapeake, captured her crew, and stole the ship for service in the Royal Navy. Cox was found guilty by a court-martial on charges of neglect of duty and conduct unbecoming an officer. He was cashiered.

Electus Litchfield, Cox’s great-grandson, spent nearly twenty years on his work to reverse what he viewed as Lieutenant Cox’s unjust conviction and restore his rank. He argued that the engagement of the Shannon was against express orders, and that it was the Chesapeake’s captain at fault, not Cox. Finally, in 1952, Congress passed a private bill authorizing the restoration of Lieutenant Cox’s rank and overturning his convictiom.

Pardon the zombie thread…

Just read an interesting article in the August 2007 issue of Naval History magazine, Robert E. Cray Jr.'s “Explaining Defeat: The Loss of the USS Chesapeake,” which mentions the Cox controversy in passing. Heinlein alluded to the case in Starship Troopers.

I agree with Billdo that military courts are Article I courts. Either the President as CINC, or Congress by legislation, may directly intervene in the workings of such courts, although it rarely happens.

[robby]

@Elendil's Heir

Pardon the zombie thread…

I read the OP on preview, and opened the thread to reply, when I saw that I already had replied…2-1/2 years ago.

[samclem]

Since this is a Zombie thread, let’s close it.

samclem General Questions Moderator