This is a reversal of a previous position. Analysis from Just Security here. Brief here. Here we have a reversal in the position of the USA due to a change in administration that appeared to have delayed effects with respect to the litigation team. The Bergdahl reply points out inconsistent contemporaneous positions taken by the USA, likely due to lack of coordination. At DOJ, legal positions are coordinated through the Solicitor General's office. Should the same be true in military appeals? Brenner FissellEIC
1 Comment
Allan
2/1/2022 06:53:22 pm
This may explain BG Martins's retirement. From all I have heard, he was an honorable litigator. For years, he had been litigating the opposite position, rightly or wrongly. Now he is told that he has to do an about face. Basically, he was told that he was advocating an unethical position (morally unethical, nothing having to do with his legal ethics (and, obviously, there are some who would disagree that it was morally unethical)). His position was untenable.
Reply
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
Links
CAAF -Daily Journal -Current Term Opinions ACCA AFCCA CGCCA NMCCA Joint R. App. Pro. Global MJ Reform LOC Mil. Law Army Lawyer Resources Categories
All
Archives
April 2022
|