Bush to undercut independence of the JAG corps

The Bush administration? Undermining the independence of military lawyers with a dubious power grab? You don’t say.

The Bush administration is pushing to take control of the promotions of military lawyers, escalating a conflict over the independence of uniformed attorneys who have repeatedly raised objections to the White House’s policies toward prisoners in the war on terrorism.

The administration has proposed a regulation requiring “coordination” with politically appointed Pentagon lawyers before any member of the Judge Advocate General corps – the military’s 4,000-member uniformed legal force – can be promoted. […]

The former JAG officers say the regulation would end the uniformed lawyers’ role as a check-and-balance on presidential power, because politically appointed lawyers could block the promotion of JAGs who they believe would speak up if they think a White House policy is illegal. (emphasis added)

Charlie Savage’s piece, which is well worth reading, adds that the plan would direct broad new power over the JAGs to William “Jim” Haynes, the Bush-appointed general counsel at the Pentagon, best known for writing the Pentagon’s infamous 2002 policies endorsing physical and mental duress on terror prisoners, and reportedly cutting top military lawyers out of the loop if they were likely to object.

Somehow, the move is both scary and predictable. Having already successfully politicized U.S. Attorneys’ offices and the application of the rule of law in the Justice Department, the Bush gang has apparently decided to apply similar rules to the Judge Advocate General corps.

[The requirement of coordination – which many former JAGs say would give the administration veto power over any JAG promotion or appointment – is consistent with past administration efforts to impose greater control over the military lawyers. […]

Retired Major General Thomas Romig, the Army’s top JAG from 2001 to 2005, called the proposal an attempt “to control the military JAGs” by sending a message that if they want to be promoted, they should be “team players” who “bow to their political masters on legal advice.”

It “would certainly have a chilling effect on the JAGs’ advice to commanders,” Romig said. “The implication is clear: without [the administration’s] approval the officer will not be promoted.”

What’s more, this is part of an effort described by the infamous John Yoo, who wrote a law review article recently arguing that JAGs might not endorse Bush’s torture policies, which means it’s time to exert more control over the JAGs.

Independence, schmendependence.

Certainly the move is “both scary and predictable.” The neocons and neofascists are making such a mess out of the current system of government that it will take decades to restore any balance. So many of these dictatorial modifications may survive scrutiny and “slip through the cracks” that my paranoid subconscious runs wild. If this crowd of petty dictators returns to power after a few election cycles, their task of converting America into corporate/theocratic state will be made easier.

  • Okay, we know what Bush is trying to do, but the question is Why? Is he just trying to assume more power for the sake of power? Or is there something more nefarious going on? From their past actions, I suspect that there is a hidden agenda somewhere.

    My crystal ball isn’t working too well this morning, but this doesn’t look good to me. It looks more and more like incremental steps leading to a dictatorship.

  • It smells like what Rove and Gonzales did to the Justice Dept. Calling Sen. Arlen Specter, wake up from your nap.

  • […] this doesn’t look good to me. It looks more and more like incremental steps leading to a dictatorship. — Sheridan, @2

    Ordnung muß sein, no? Until recently, Bush thought he could count on the military to be and remain his faithful follower. Now that the new numbers are showing otherwise (due, mostly, to the I-wreck), he needs to shore up his stranglehold on it. What any good dictator would do and what, I’m sure, DicKKKtator has been advising for a long time.

  • # 2 Sheridan said it way more politely than I would have, but my crystal ball has been spitting this theory out for a while now!

    Conspiracy theorists unite!!

  • It is quite amazing. You can now actually see in real time our creep towards totalitarianism. When Bush first came to office about once or twice a month I saw something that would make me wince and wonder what the hell was happening. Now, stuff like this is happening daily, and I wish it is all just a bad dream. What can we do to stop this madness?

  • The topic “independence in the JAGC” would draw laughs back in my day. Both the Trial Counselor and defense attorney were in the identical chain of command. The UCMJ and Manual for Court Martial looked like the fairest jurisprudence scripture on earth; instead of a Grand Jury in which your attorney is barred, the military corollary Article 31 investigation allows the accused to not only to have his attorney present but to cross-examine witnesses and indeed subpoena his own, if it doesn’t upset the mission. And, when I was doing discharge upgrading, the judicial review courts were the most liberal in the land, by far, according to an advocate. Court of Military Review, I think it was. Been a long time.

    However, the common command was a factor. A troop confined without charges presented for 90 days was free to go, but his attorney might not agree to press it. “Look, you’re gonna have to do some time.” I mean, it’s only fair, but any civilian attorney would see his job as cheating for his client if necessary to win.

    Thanks for the memories.

  • Comments are closed.