tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post5773453760206149606..comments2023-08-24T10:39:23.460-04:00Comments on CAAFlog: Article 2 articleDwight Sullivanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11657981110237418710noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-32356031336761013062007-07-20T11:06:00.000-04:002007-07-20T11:06:00.000-04:00I could imagine a "contingency operation" that is ...I could imagine a "contingency operation" that is so far divorced from war that it exercising court-martial jurisdiction over a contractor might not pass constitutional muster. That said, there's a long history of courts-martial for civilians accompanying the armed forces in the field, and it seems to me that the Supreme Court (see Solorio) places great value on historical practice. In fact a number of the Supreme Court cases addressing courts-martial in the nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries involved Navy paymasters aboard ship, who were not in the service, caught with their hands in the cookie jar.John O'Connorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08014476389355562158noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-39924426392653843802007-07-19T23:01:00.000-04:002007-07-19T23:01:00.000-04:00For those interested, a prescient article from 200...For those interested, a prescient article from 2006 argues for expanded UCMJ jurisdiciton. http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/ksil374.pdf.<BR/><BR/>Now how do I get that article without a billing number . . . .Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com