A job announcement on the website of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces seeks applicants for a two-year (renewable) at-will appointment as a staff attorney on the Central Legal Staff. According to the announcement:
The principal tasks of the staff attorney include:
he part of particular interest is the italicized language in the first bullet. Here is what Art. 67(a)(3), UCMJ says:
The Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces shall review the record in--
"We are all textualists now," Justice Elena Kagan has famously said. As you read the text of the statute, does it contemplate that the court will conduct its own de novo review of the record of trial before it has granted review? Doesn't the past tense of the terminal "has granted a review" clause indicate that the duty to "review the record" arises only after good cause has been shown and the petition has been granted? Is the court putting the review-the-record cart before the grant-of-review-for-good-cause horse?
My personal comments would be that if done correctly,
Cross-posted with permission from Gene Fidell at Global Military Justice Reform blog. Cheers, P.C.
CAAFlog 1.0 Archive
-Current Term Opinions
Joint R. App. Pro.
Global MJ Reform
LOC Mil. Law Resources