Presidential Preferences and Aspiring Appointees: Selections to the U.S. Court of Military Appeals 1951-1968
![handle is hein.journals/wflr29 and id is 531 raw text is: PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCES AND ASPIRING
APPOINTEES: SELECTIONS TO THE U.S. COURT OF
MILITARY APPEALS 1951-1968
Jonathan Lurie*t
In this survey of presidential appointments to the United States
Court of Military Appeals from that court's inception in 1951 until
1968, Professor Lurie reveals the increasingly politicized nature of va-
rious Chief Executives' selection processes. Professor Lurie uses pri-
mary evidence from the Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson
administrations to highlight a decades-long trend toward elevating po-
litical concerns over substantive issues of military justice in naming
judges to the court.
The late Fred Rodell once wrote that there are two things wrong
with almost all legal writing. One is its style. The other is its content.'
Concerning an author who publishes an article in a law journal such as
this one, Rodell added that the average law review writer is peculiarly
able to say nothing with an air of great importance.2 Thus it is with
some hesitancy-if not outright trepidation-that I offer these
paragraphs about the unusual synthesis of principle, preference, and ex-
pediency that has characterized presidential appointments to the United
States Court of Military Appeals (USCMA) since its creation. Although
the USCMA has operated for more than forty years, these pages focus on
selections to its bench between 1950 and 1968.'
* Professor of History and Adjunct Professor of Law, Rutgers University. Professor
Lurie received his Bachelor's and Master's degrees from Harvard University, and his Ph.D.
from the University of Wisconsin. He is currently serving as Historian to the United States
Court of Military Appeals, and during 1994-95 will be a Visiting Professor of Law at West
Point Military Academy.
t Due to the nature of the sources cited by Professor Lurie, the Wake Forest Law Review
has been unable to independently verify the accuracy of many of these materials. Accord-
ingly, the Wake Forest Law Review has, in many cases, relied solely on the information
provided by Professor Lurie. Any questions regarding the contents of this article should
therefore be directed to him. All cited manuscript excerpts are currently on file with the
author, and will be deposited with the United States Court of Military Appeals upon com-
pletion of Professor Lurie's forthcoming book on the subject, from which this article is
drawn.
1. Fred Rodell, Good Bye to Law Reviews, VA. L. REv. 23, 34-35 (1936).
2. Id. at 35.
3. This article is excerpted from a larger work in progress, 2 JONATHAN LURIE, ARMING
MILITARY JUSTICE: HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF MILITARY APPEALS (forthcoming
1995) [hereinafter LURIE]. The author joined the court staff as historian in 1987, and in 1992
published his account of the history of American appellate military justice as 1 JONATHAN
LURIE, ARMING MILITARY JUSTICE: ORIGINS OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF MILITARY Ap-](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/wflr29&div=22&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Presidential Preferences and Aspiring Appointees: Selections to the U.S. Court of Military Appeals 1951-1968
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most