In the Manual for Courts-Martial, the President of the United States has established the procedural, evidentiary, and other rules that govern many aspects of the military justice system. This article describes and analyzes nine arguments that litigants have advanced when asking courts to ignore or invalidate Manual provisions: (1) The Manual provision is merely precatory; (2) The Manual provision conflicts with the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); (3) The Manual provision conflicts with another Manual provision; (4) The Manual provision conflicts with a federal regulation; (5) The President lacked authority to promulgate the Manual provision; (6) The Manual provision is arbitrary and capricious; (7) The Manual provision interprets an ambiguous portion of the UCMJ and a better interpretation is possible; (8) The President promulgated the Manual pursuant to an improper delegation from Congress; and (9) The Manual provision violates the accused's constitutional rights.
GW Paper Series
GWU Law School Public Law Research Paper No. 382; GWU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 382
Gregory E. Maggs, Judicial Review of the Manual for Courts-Martial, 160 Mil. L. Rev. 96 (1999).