The Corner

Dear Congress, Get Your Hands Off the Military Justice System

In this week’s dead-tree version of National Review, I take a look at the president and Congress’s amateurish attempt to make sure that more soldiers are convicted of sexual assault. While sexual assault is undoubtedly a heinous crime, no act of Congress, no statement of congressional outrage, can make the facts of individual cases less ambiguous. In civilian or military contexts, sexual-assault cases are often the most difficult to prosecute — and not because prosecutors or judges hate women but because there’s this pesky little document called the “Constitution,” and there are these annoying doctrines called “burdens of proof,” that stand in the way of any state-led effort to deprive a defendant of his liberty.

The military’s most severe critics have focused on commanders’ alleged inability to prosecute sexual-assault cases. The alternative, according to these critics, is to remove commanders’ ability to prosecute cases and grant new authority to “impartial” military lawyers. The New York Times is an enthusiastic cheerleader for this effort.

As part of its latest argument for circumventing the chain of command and command authority, the Times trots out the recent failure of two high-profile sexual-assault prosecutions — one against an Army general, the other against a former Naval Academy football player. Here’s the Times, locked into its narrative that commanders shouldn’t adjudicate sexual-assault cases:

Two highly publicized military sexual assault cases this week appear to strengthen the argument of those who want to take such cases out of the hands of military commanders — but not only for the reason that has been widely debated in Congress, which is that the hierarchy is unfair to women.

Instead, critics say, the slap on the wrist delivered to Brig. Gen. Jeffrey A. Sinclair, who was accused of sexually mistreating a subordinate, and the not guilty verdict delivered to the former Naval Academy football player who was accused of sexual assault reflect a military command that bowed to political pressure and brought bad cases to trial.

This is utter nonsense. The motivation for circumventing the chain of command was not to protect the accused. The motivation for circumventing the chain of command was to obtain more successful prosecutions. The political pressure was clear: Prosecute more, and prosecute more successfully. That’s why marginal cases are being brought to trial, not because commanders are uniquely bad at justice.

When that’s the priority, does any rational human being think that military lawyers are less ambitious, less attuned to the political prevailing winds than military commanders? Are lawyers any less human than commanders? Elevate a group of lawyers to some kind of sex-crime SEAL Team Six, and you’ll get the same result — more prosecutions, but not necessarily better or more just prosecutions.

The bottom line is that the political class is putting enormous pressure on the military to prosecute more cases, and this pressure will result in the kinds of botched cases we saw last week. Senator Gillibrand – the military’s chief congressional critic – gives the game away with this utterly confused quote:

The result of the two cases means that even fewer assault victims will come forward, critics say. “No one has any confidence in the system after a case like this,” Ms. Gillibrand said in an interview, referring to the Sinclair case. “Prosecution has to be unbiased and can’t be based on politics. It should be based on, ‘Was a crime committed?’”

She called it “infuriating that justice wasn’t served.”

How does she have the slightest clue whether justice was served in these cases? Does she know more about the evidence and credibility of the accusers than the actual participants in the proceedings? Is the important factor in a criminal case whether it encourages or discourages victims from coming forward or whether the trial was fair and the outcome in line with the evidence?

If Congress wants better outcomes in military justice, it needs to get its thumb off the scales. Stop demanding prosecutions. Stop demanding outcomes. No amount of political outrage will better enable a commander (or a lawyer) to determine the truth when evidence is ambiguous, credibility is difficult to determine, and he said/she said is often clouded not only by alcohol but often by complex and conflicting accounts of pre-existing and post-encounter relationships.

The United States military is not a social-justice enterprise with an ancillary war-fighting mission. It’s a war-fighting enterprise and, as such, its justice system is designed to achieve justice in the context of enhancing the overall war-fighting mission of the military. Thus, civilian leaders should tread very lightly before adjusting the commander’s role in administering justice. Undermining command authority has costs, and those costs are often not apparent until the system is under maximum strain — fighting the conflicts it’s designed to fight.

David French — David French is a senior writer for National Review, a senior fellow at the National Review Institute, and a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

Students’ Anti-Gun Views

Are children innocents or are they leaders? Are teenagers fully autonomous decision-makers, or are they lumps of mental clay, still being molded by unfolding brain development? The Left seems to have a particularly hard time deciding these days. Take, for example, the high-school students from Parkland, ... Read More
PC Culture

Kill Chic

We live in a society in which gratuitous violence is the trademark of video games, movies, and popular music. Kill this, shoot that in repugnant detail becomes a race to the visual and spoken bottom. We have gone from Sam Peckinpah’s realistic portrayal of violent death to a gory ritual of metal ripping ... Read More
Elections

Romney Is a Misfit for America

Mitt’s back. The former governor of Massachusetts and occasional native son of Michigan has a new persona: Mr. Utah. He’s going to bring Utah conservatism to the whole Republican party and to the country at large. Wholesome, efficient, industrious, faithful. “Utah has a lot to teach the politicians in ... Read More
Law & the Courts

What the Second Amendment Means Today

The horrifying school massacre in Parkland, Fla., has prompted another national debate about guns. Unfortunately, it seems that these conversations are never terribly constructive — they are too often dominated by screeching extremists on both sides of the aisle and armchair pundits who offer sweeping opinions ... Read More
U.S.

Fire the FBI Chief

American government is supposed to look and sound like George Washington. What it actually looks and sounds like is Henry Hill from Goodfellas: bad suit, hand out, intoning the eternal mantra: “F*** you, pay me.” American government mostly works by interposition, standing between us, the free people at ... Read More
Film & TV

Black Panther’s Circle of Hype

The Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) first infantilizes its audience, then banalizes it, and, finally, controls it through marketing. This commercial strategy, geared toward adolescents of all ages, resembles the Democratic party’s political manipulation of black Americans, targeting that audience through its ... Read More