Jonathan
Lurie.
Military Justice in America: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces,
1775-1980.
Modern War Studies Series. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2001. xiv +
347 pp. Illustration, bibliography, index. $25.00 (paper), ISBN
0-7006-1080-4.
Reviewed
by:
Michal R. Belknap , California Western School of Law and University of
California, San Diego.
Published by:
H-Law
(March, 2002)
Discovering Military Justice
To
most American historians, and indeed to most American lawyers, military law
is terra incognita. It is as unfamiliar, and seems as distant and
foreboding, as Antarctica. That which is unfamiliar is not necessarily
unimportant.
Antarctica's ice cap
covers vast mineral resources, and likewise, although seemingly distant and
inaccessible, military law is an important subject, which merits far more
scholarly attention than it has received. President George Bush reminded the
legal profession of its significance when, on November 13, 2001, he issued
an order that authorized trying aliens suspected of membership in the al
Queda terrorist organization before military tribunals.[1] Jonathan Lurie
offers further evidence of the importance of this largely unknown area of
the law in Military Justice in America.
Actually, he had already demonstrated its significance in Arming Military
Justice (1992) and Pursuing Military Justice (1998), a two
volume-history of the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (USCAAF).
Unfortunately, Princeton University Press, which published those books, did
not promote them heavily, and these expensive hardbacks were not as widely
read as they should have been. The University Press of Kansas has now
combined them into a single paperback volume, which it has included in its
Modern War Studies series, edited by Theodore Wilson. In order to limit the
length of the new book, Lurie omitted some portions of the original text and
abridged others. He also eliminated the footnotes entirely. Consequently,
scholars wishing to probe deeply into the mysteries of military justice will
need to consult the original Princeton University Press volumes. For those
seeking a concise introduction to an unfamiliar subject, however, this book
is ideal.
It
introduces the reader to a little-known court that occupies a novel place in
our legal system. The USCAAF exercises appellate jurisdiction over court
martials in all branches of the armed forces. It is the capstone of a
judicial system that bears a unique double burden, having to do justice
while also maintaining discipline. Yet, while the USCAAF oversees military
justice, all of its judges are civilians. That is not its only unusual
feature. Although called a "Court of Appeals," USCAAF differs significantly
from the similarly-named bodies that review district court decisions in the
twelve geographically-defined federal judicial circuits. Although its
decisions are now, like theirs, reviewable by the U.S. Supreme Court upon
the granting of a writ of certiorari, it is not, like them, an Article III
court. Created by Congress in the exercise of its power to make rules for
the governance of the land and naval forces, USCAAF derives its authority
from Article I of the Constitution. For administrative purposes it is part
of the Department of Defense. Nor do its judges, despite repeated efforts to
change what most of them have regarded as an unsatisfactory situation, enjoy
life tenure. Instead, they serve fifteen year terms.
Besides having a number of unusual features, the United States Court of
Appeals for the Armed Forces has a rather brief history. It came into
existence as a result of congressional enactment of the Uniform Code of
Military Justice (UCMJ) in 1950. Until then, the military was literally a
law unto itself; more accurately, the Army and Navy was each a law unto
itself. Although there were differences between the legal systems of the two
services, both were designed primarily to enforce discipline. Commanders
exercised a huge amount of control over courts-martial, and defendants
enjoyed few procedural rights. There was no way for those who were convicted
(and that was most of them) to appeal their convictions to a civil court,
and only by petitioning for a writ of habeas corpus could they get any
civilian judge to examine the legality of the treatment they had received.
As countless wags observed, "military justice" was an oxymoron. As long as
the armed services were small and largely segregated from the rest of
society, the country tolerated its deficiencies, but during World War II
mass mobilization subjected millions of Americans to this harsh and often
unfair legal regime. "The magnitude of American involvement in World War II
produced extensive interest and concern with the way military justice was
administered," Lurie writes (p. 152). It also generated pressures for
unification of the armed forces. Among the byproducts of the movement that
led to creation of the Department of Defense were the UCMJ and the USCAAF
(originally known as the Court of Military Appeals).
Although that court has been in existence for barely over half a century,
the problems with and disputes over military justice that led to its
creation reach back to the earliest days of the Republic. So does Lurie's
book. Consequently, the main character in his drama does not appear on stage
for the first time until page 169. Lurie devotes twelve chapters to the
events and controversies that demonstrated the need for a body such as the
USCAAF, the legislative process that created it, and the political
considerations that determined who its first judges would be.[2] As a
result, his book is much more than a history of one court. It is, at least
for the period prior to 1951, what its title claims: a history of military
justice in America. The early chapters are, to be sure, a chronicle with a
purpose; they serve to make creation of the USCAAF seem not only desirable
but almost inevitable. Yet, they also make this a much deeper and broader
book than its somewhat deceptive subtitle implies.[3]
Although it does much more than simply chronicle the comparatively brief
career of the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces,
Military Justice in America is above all an account of the development
of that unique judicial institution. That makes it a rather uncommon kind of
book, for institutional histories of American courts are relatively rare.
There are, of course, two multi-volume monograph series and a documentary
history that relate the development and decisions of the United States
Supreme Court.[4] The rest of the federal judiciary has attracted far less
scholarly attention. The teams of Tony Fryer and Timothy Dixon and Kermit
Hall and Eric Rise have produced studies of the federal courts in Alabama
and Florida respectively, and Charles Zelden has surveyed the work of the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas during the period
1902-1960.[5] There is a dearth of monographs on district courts elsewhere,
however. The federal courts of appeals have fared even worse. There are two
excellent monographs on the Fifth Circuit, but each has a rather narrow and
specialized focus.[6] David Fredericks's book on the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals covers only the period 1891-1941.[7] For more comprehensive
treatments, one must turn to commemorative works produced by the judiciary
itself.[8]
Although vastly superior to those commemorative books, Lurie's Military
Justice in America is also an authorized history. In 1987 the USCAAF invited
him to become its official historian and archivist, a compensated position
that he held for more than a decade. The existence of such a relationship
between scholar and subject raises inevitable concerns about the objectivity
of the resulting book. As other legal historians, among them Harold Hyman
and this reviewer, can attest, it is difficult to maintain complete
detachment when writing authorized books about institutions with whose
current employees one is in day-to-day contact while doing the research.[9]
Almost inevitably, the historian comes to identify at least a little with
his subject and begins to feel at least a bit like part of the "team" rather
than an outside observer. Lurie is not immune from these tendencies, but he
has resisted them. For one thing, he chose to end his history with the
appointment of Robinson O. Everett as Chief Judge in 1980, thus minimizing
the need to assess the performance of people still working at the USCAAF.
Also, he insisted upon editorial independence, a demand that the judges of
the court respected, both by distancing themselves from his research and by
allowing both the original two-volume work and this one-volume paperback
edition to be published by independent and highly respected university
presses. This is unquestionably a favorable treatment of the United States
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, but it is not an uncritical one.
Lurie accurately reflects both the book's tone and his attitude toward his
subject when he writes in the Preface that while "freely admitting that
inexplicable and inexcusable lapses in military justice have indeed
occurred...," he believes this "in no way diminishes the significance of
impressive changes that have taken place since 1951" (p. xiii).
The
changes that interest him are organizational rather than doctrinal. As Lurie
acknowledges in the Preface, "While of necessity a number of important cases
are discussed, my focus is not legal doctrine as much as institutional
evolution" (p. xii). Unlike many recent histories of the U.S. Supreme Court,
this book has little to say about judicial decision-making. It devotes far
less attention to the internal deliberations of the USCAAF than to its
judges' unsuccessful lobbying for life tenure and their perpetual conflicts
with the Judge Advocates General of the Army, Navy and Air Force over who
should set policy for the military justice system. This book actually deals
more extensively with the legislative process than with the judicial process
narrowly defined. It has considerably more to say about congressional
legislation affecting military justice, (much of which never passed), than
it does about the decisions of the USCAAF. Somewhat surprisingly for a
history of a court, Military Justice in America does not include a table of
cases.
Since
Lurie is a disciple of the late J. Willard Hurst, his lack of interest in
doctrinal development is hardly surprising.[10] Still, one wishes he had a
bit more to say about the decisions of the USCAAF. Two members of that court
resigned before the end of their terms in order to accept federal district
judgeships, at least in part because they found its work boring.
Consequently, the reader cannot help but wonder if what the USCAAF does is
really all that important. Lurie obviously believes it is, but more
discussion of the court's rulings and their impact on soldiers, sailors, and
airmen would strengthen his case.
This
would also be a better book if Lurie did not begin quite so many sentences
with, "It will be seen...." As one can see from the nit-picking nature of
this complaint, it is difficult to find fault with Military Justice in
America. Jonathan Lurie has tackled a topic that even most legal
historians find alien and forbidding and has managed to make it not only
accessible and understandable but also interesting. Those are substantial
achievements, and this is an important book. With Lurie's scholarship now
readily available to lawyers and legal historians, American military justice
is no longer terra incognita.
Notes
[1].
On the contemporary dispute over these military tribunals, as well as the
role that military commissions have played in American history, see Michal
R. Belknap, "A Putrid Pedigree: President Bush's Military Tribunals in
Historical Perspective," 38 California Western Law Review (Spring
2001)(forthcoming).
[2].
The first eleven chapters cover the material dealt with in Arming
Military Justice, the first volume of the two-volume hardback book
published by Princeton University Press.
[3].
The subtitle is, of course, inaccurate because there was no U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Armed Forces (or Court of Military Appeals) from 1775 until
1951.
[4].
The monograph series are the Oliver Wendell Holmes Devise History of the
Supreme Court, currently edited by Stanley Katz and published by
Macmillan, and the Chief Justiceships of the United States Supreme Court,
edited by Herbert Johnson and published by the University of South Carolina
Press. The documentary history is the Documentary History of the Supreme
Court of the
United States
1789-1980,
edited by Maeva Marcus, et al. and published by Columbia University Press.
[5].
Tony Allan Freyer and Timothy Dixon, Democracy and Judicial Independence:
A History of the Federal Courts of Alabama, 1820-1994 (Brooklyn, N.Y.:
Carlson Publilsher, 1995); Kermit Hall and Eric W. Rise, From Local
Courts to National Tribunals: The Federal District Courts of Florida,
1821-1990 (Brooklyn, N.Y.: Carlson Publisher, 1991); Charles L. Zelden,
Justice Lies in the District: The U.S. District Court, Southern District
of Texas, 1902-1960 (College Station: Texas A & M University Press,
1993).
[6].
Deborah J. Barrow and Thomas G. Walker, A Court Divided: The Fifth
Circuit Court of Appeals and the Politics of Judicial Reform (New Haven:
Yale University Press, 1988); Jack Bass, Unlikely Heroes: The Dramatic
Story of the Southern Judges of the Fifth Circuit who Translated the Supreme
Court's Brown Decision into a Revolution for Equality (New York: Simon
and Schuster, 1981).
[7].
David C. Frederick, Rugged Justice: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
and the American West, 1881-1941 (Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1994).
[8].
See for example, Judicial Conference of the United States Bicentennial
Committee, A History of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth
Circuit (Washington: Judicial Conference of the United States
Bicentennial Committee, 1977) and United States Court of Appeals, District
of Columbia Circuit, History of the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit in the Country's Bicentennial Year
(Washington: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit, 1977).
[9].
See Harold Hyman, Craftsmanship and Character: A History of the Vinson
and Elkins Law Firm of
Houston,
1917-1997
(Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1998); Michal R. Belknap, To
Improve the Administration of Justice: A History of the American Judicature
Society (Chicago: American Judicature Society, 1992).
[10].
Both Lurie and this reviewer studied with Hurst at the University of
Wisconsin.
Library
of Congress
Call Number: KF7667.L873 2001
Subjects:
*
United States. Court of Military Appeals -- History
*
Courts-martial and courts of inquiry -- United States -- History
Citation: Michal R. Belknap . "Review of Jonathan Lurie, Military Justice in
America: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, 1775-1980," H-Law,
H-Net Reviews, March, 2002. URL: http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.cgi?path=209551017855587.
“One of the best ways for historians, lawyers, military
buffs, and military members to learn about military justice is by reading
Jonathan Lurie’s Military Justice in America…This well-written book
will appeal to any person interested in military justice or American
history.”
Major Herman Reinhold, USAF, review of Military
Justice in America: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces,
1775-1980, by Jonathan Lurie, Military Review 83 (July – August
2003): 74.