Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. Caldwell

Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

Decided April 29, 2013No. 12-0353/MCPublished

1Dissent

RYAN, Judge, with whom STUCKY, Judge, joins

(dissenting):

It is the prerogative of Congress, not this Court, to enact laws governing the armed forces, including those that define criminal offenses. U.S. Const, art. I, § 8, cl. 14. In Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. § 934, Congress criminalized “all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces” and “all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.” A suicide attempt may constitute self-injury without intent to avoid service and is conduct punishable…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. United States v. CareUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1969
  2. United States v. InabinetteCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2008
  3. United States v. FairclothCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1996
  4. United States v. RoderickCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2006
  5. United States v. VaughanCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2003

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API