Supreme Court considers legality of court-martialling retirees

GEAR CHECK: Our readers don't just follow the news - they stay ready. Featured gear from this story is below.

Staff Writer

The United States Supreme Court is poised to delve into a critical constitutional issue as it prepares to weigh the legality of court-martialling retired military personnel. The decision to review this matter has garnered significant attention and has raising questions about the rights and legal standing of retirees within the military justice system.

At the centre of the impending Supreme Court case is the plea of Retired Staff Sargent. Steven M. Larrabee, who has challenged the constitutionality of his court-martial under military law.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Supreme Court may weigh constitutionality of court-martialing retirees <a href="https://t.co/VTjTUyAp0z">https://t.co/VTjTUyAp0z</a></p>&mdash; The Center for Military Law &amp; Justice (@MilVetLawPolicy) <a href="https://twitter.com/MilVetLawPolicy/status/1659752507885735938?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 20, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Larrabee pleaded guilty to sexual assault of a civilian bartender in Iwakuni, Japan, and indecent recording charges, which occurred after his retirement as a member of the Fleet Marine Corps Reserve. Despite his guilty plea, Larrabee contends that he should have been tried under civilian law, not subjected to military justice.

Larrabee’s cert petitions, filed with the Supreme Court in 2018 and again in May, followed earlier rejections by appeals courts. While the Supreme Court initially declined to hear his case in early 2019, a significant turning point occurred when Federal Judge Richard J. Leon in Washington, D.C. ruled in 2020 that the military prosecution faced by Larrabee was unconstitutional.

The case raises crucial legal questions about the jurisdiction and applicability of military law to retired service members.
Opponents of court-martialling retirees argue that subjecting them to military justice infringes upon their constitutional rights to due process and equal protection under the law. They maintain that retired personnel, upon transitioning to civilian status, should be tried in civilian courts like any other citizen.

You may also like

Blog

A man allegedly smashed a historic Marine Corps monument with a sledgehammer, knocking the head off one of the depicted Marines. Police estimate the damage could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to repair, and investigators have not disclosed a motive.
A weapon that makes people feel as if their skin is burning could soon be tested for border enforcement. The Pentagon has approved a seven-month evaluation, raising questions about how far military technology should go in civilian operations.
Veterans seeking medical care in Orlando now have another place to turn when groceries become difficult to afford. The new pantry offers free food, as changes to federal assistance rules raise fresh concerns about support for vulnerable veterans.
A ballistic missile attack struck a military training camp as young recruits stood in formation, killing at least 73 and injuring more than 200, according to Yemeni officials. The attack has become one of the deadliest blows in the country’s renewed civil war.
A grass fire turned deadly during a live-fire exercise at a Canadian military base, killing four soldiers and sending 39 people to hospitals. Officials say sudden winds drove the flames forward so quickly that troops had less than a minute to react.

Like This Story? Check Out What Our Community Is Buying

Our best sellers are designed for real-world use - not hype.

View Best Sellers