case study military law

Military Justice Research

Specialized journals & collections, articles databases, all gw library databases, case law sources, deciphering acronyms and abbreviations.

• Issuances & Regulations
• Research Resources
• Historical Documents

Access Icon Key

Search the following databases for scholarly articles and reports, or see our A to Z list of databases available to GW Law faculty and students.

• Burns Law Library Databases, A-Z list
• GW Libraries Databases, A-Z list
• Himmelfarb Health Sciences Library Databases, A-Z List

United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (C.A.A.F.), previously United States Court of Military Appeals (C.M.A.)

Military Service Courts of Criminal Appeals,  previously Courts of Military Review (e.g., A.C.M.R.), previously Boards of Review (e.g., A.B.R.)

• Army Ct. Crim. App.
• A.F. Ct. Crim. App.
• C.G. Ct. Crim. App.
• N-M. Ct. Crim. App.

Reference Sources:

• << Previous: UCMJ & MCM
• Next: Issuances & Regulations >>
• Last Updated: Apr 18, 2023 2:44 PM
• URL: https://law.gwu.libguides.com/militaryjustice

• Volume Archive
• Harvard NSLA

The Legality of Killing Osama bin Laden

by Stephen M. Pezzi | May 16, 2011 | Online Edition , Student Articles

By Stephen M. Pezzi —

On Sunday, May 1st, an elite unit of U.S. Navy SEALs carried out a raid on a fortified home in Abottabad, Pakistan, during which Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden was killed by two American bullets.  Although the details surrounding the raid are not completely known, information has been seeping out to the public (often correcting, updating, or contradicting prior reports).  What is known for certain: Osama bin Laden was intentionally targeted and killed, after some measure of resistance, and buried at sea.  A few hours later, in a late-night address to the nation, President Obama declared to the American people that “justice has been done.”

The raid took place without Pakistani knowledge, consent, or cooperation, on Pakistani soil.  The killing led to impromptu celebrations across America: in Washington, D.C. , New York City , at an ongoing Phillies-Mets baseball game , and college campuses nationwide.  It has since prompted threats of retribution from Al-Qaeda, as well as counter-protests in Pakistan .  Bin Laden’s “hiding place,” — a stone’s throw away from a Pakistani military academy — raises new questions about Pakistan’s commitment to assisting the United States in its fight against terrorism.  In the words of CIA director Leon Panetta, Pakistan was either “ involved or incompetent .”

Perhaps unsurprisingly, it did not take long for critics of the Bush-Obama national security approach to raise legal questions surrounding the operation.  Based upon the limited information currently available, there are legal responses to each, and the raid appears to have been justified under both domestic and international law .  The domestic question is simple: Congress’s 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force gives the President broad authority to use force against those who “planned, authorized, [or] committed” the September 11th terrorist attacks — Bin Laden’s most infamous achievement.  With respect to international law, there are at least two strands of criticism.

Pakistani Sovereignty

This operation took place within the sovereign borders of Pakistan — a nation that is supposedly a United States ally — without Pakistani knowledge or consent.  Some have argued, including Pakistan’s former president Pervez Musharraf , that this violates Article 2(4) of the U.N. Charter , as a “use of force” that violates member-state Pakistan’s “territorial integrity.”  However, the operation can find legal support in Article 51 of the U.N. Charter , which provides that “[n]othing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence.”  It is this “self-defense” rationale that most easily justifies the violation of Pakistani sovereignty — because Bin Laden was widely believed to be continuously planning further terrorist attacks on the United States , removing this threat was necessary to protect United States national security.  While some argue that the Obama administration has been surprisingly quiet as to the specific legal justifications for the raid, Attorney General Eric Holder has specifically invoked this “national self-defense” rationale .

However, even assuming that this action was taken in “national self-defense,” some scholars have advanced the position that Pakistani consent was first required, unless Pakistan was “unwilling or unable” to suppress the threat itself.  Of course, whether or not the “unwilling or unable” test was satisfied here is difficult to answer without additional information.  However, based on what is currently available, Pakistan certainly appeared “ involved or incompetent ,” and there was clearly reason to believe that involving the Pakistanis could have led to Bin Laden’s escape.  Surely Bin Laden’s escape from Tora Bora was on the mind of U.S. officials as they decided that, this time, it was preferable to act alone ( many have suggested that the 2001 escape was aided by Pakistanis).  Thus, upon learning that Bin Laden was hiding “in plain sight,” in a military town that has been analogized to our own West Point , there is strong legal justification for acting in self-defense — even without Pakistani knowledge or consent.

The Targeted Killing of Osama Bin Laden

Another facet of the legal analysis of the operation involves what actually took place when the SEALs arrived at Bin Laden’s Abottabad compound.  Here, the uncertainty surrounding what actually happened makes it difficult to offer a concrete analysis.  Several scholars have written at length about the general legal implications surrounding targeted killings as a counterterrorism strategy — including in a forthcoming article by Philip Alston in Volume 2 of the Harvard National Security Journal .  I will not summarize or repeat that analysis here — it suffices to say that reasonable minds differ on the legality of the practice, as applied to varying targets, locations, and scenarios.  Instead, I will offer a brief discussion of the legal questions specific to the targeted killing of Osama bin Laden.

As initially described by Obama administration officials, this was a “capture or kill” operation, meaning that if the Navy SEALs could have done so safely, they would have captured Bin Laden alive.  Early reports suggested that Bin Laden himself was killed in a shootout.  Under this scenario, there is no reasonable argument that could be made that the operation was unlawful, as even those critical of U.S. national security policies have acknowledged .  However, subsequent clarifications from the White House have confirmed that Bin Laden was likely unarmed.  This development has led some to question whether the SEALs were under an obligation to offer Bin Laden an opportunity to surrender, before shooting him.

Unsurprisingly, how one views this question will turn on how one views the larger conflict with Al Qaeda and the war on terror, as a general matter.  For those who consider this an ongoing armed conflict, where the theater or war includes any location where a terrorist is physically located (the Bush-Obama position), this is simply an example of killing an enemy commander on the battlefield — akin to the killing of Japanese Admiral Isoroko Yamamoto during World War II.  In the words of Attorney General Eric Holder: “ It is lawful to target an enemy commander in the field .”  Thus, whether as a “combat-based” target (someone actively resisting by force), or a “status-based” target (a physically identifiable leader of enemy forces), Bin Laden could be legally targeted and killed , unless he had already completed surrender.  On the other hand, for those who maintain the United States is not at war, this is simply extrajudicial execution, akin to a political assassination — it is a taking of a human life without any sort of judicial process.

Of course, this entire debate is purely academic in two senses.  First, most would agree that it would clearly be inappropriate to second-guess the split-second, heat-of-battle determination by the Navy SEALs that there were reasonable grounds to believe that a peaceful surrender was not forthcoming — whether or not Bin Laden was armed, and whether or not this battlefield judgment was actually correct.  In other words, even if, as a factual matter, Bin Laden would have surrendered if offered the opportunity (a plausible, though perhaps unlikely scenario), under the circumstances, it would have been very difficult for him to convey that fact convincingly, in such a way that the Navy SEALs could have been confident that no threat existed (to be effective, surrender must be “completed”).  Secondly, the debate is literally “academic” — in that this question is likely of little interest to the millions around the world who have either rejoiced or lamented this man’s death.  Osama bin Laden’s ultimate fate was not decided in a courtroom, but in a White House situation room .  While this may bother some in the international community, the legal questions raised here, are also likely to be seriously examined further only in academic contexts such as this one.

Image courtesy of the Department of Defense

Military Law Research

• Introduction
• Statutes and Regulations
• United States Military Courts
• Secondary Sources
• Treaties and Conventions
• International Organizations
• International Courts and Tribunals
• Customary International Humanitarian Law
• Statutes and Legislative History
• Executive Orders and Regulations
• Secondary Sources and Current Awareness

Structure of U.S. Military Court System

Military justice courts, courts & relevant abbreviations.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice ("UCMJ") sets forth the jurisdiction and procedure of the courts-martial and military appellate courts. See 10 U.S.C. §§ 801–946 (2018).  The courts-martial are the military's courts of original jurisdiction, with appellate review occurring in Military Service Courts of Criminal Appeals and the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. Decisions of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces are reviewable by the U.S. Supreme Court.  

The official names of the appellate courts and the case reporters that published their opinions changed over time, and thus you may see citations to what appear to be different courts or case reporters during your research process. The following abbreviations of the courts and their reporter series can help you recognize when you are dealing with an earlier version of a current military appellate court:

• Decisions of the United States Court of Military Appeals (1951-75) - C.M.A.
• West's Military Justice Reporter (1978-present) - M.J.
• Court Martial Reports (1951-1975) - C.M.R.
• Army Court of Criminal Appeals (A. Ct. Crim. App.)
• Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals (A.F. Ct. Crim. App.)
• Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals (C.G. Ct. Crim. App.)
• Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals (N-M. Ct. Crim. App.)
• West's Military Justice Reporter (1975-present) - M.J.

Abbreviations can be quickly viewed in The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation , Table T1.1. Copies of The Bluebook are available for borrowing at the law library's circulation desk.

Case Reporters

Legal researchers can access some volumes of the various military justice case reporters via court websites. Many of these collections are incomplete and do not provide a means for advanced keyword searching, which can make them difficult for legal researchers to use effectively. We have provided links to the relevant court websites below.

Court-Martial Reports are available via HeinOnline as PDF images of the original reporter series. For more advanced keyword searching, be sure to use Westlaw Edge's Military Court Cases collection , which contains cases from both the Court Martial Reporter and the Military Justice Reporter (altogether, 1951-present).  As with all cases available in Westlaw Edge, you will also have access to KeyCite and other valuable secondary source recommendations.

(Note: Westlaw Edge is available to UNC Law students and faculty.)

The following is a list of the military courts and their websites:

• U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
• Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals
• Army Court of Criminal Appeals
• Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals
• Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals

Another place to quickly access relevant military and government websites is CAAFlog , a privately-maintained blog that provides updates and commentary on recent developments in military justice law. The sidebar on this blog provides direct links to much of the publicly-available military justice law material.

• << Previous: Statutes and Regulations
• Next: Secondary Sources >>
• Last Updated: Oct 19, 2023 4:41 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.unc.edu/militarylaw

Home > Cross Disciplinary Publications > IJEL > Vol. 5 (2018)

Article Title

Why Ethical Leadership Matters: A Case Study to Improve Military Specialists' Employee Retention Rates

David J. Kritz

Recommended Citation

Kritz, David J. (2018) "Why Ethical Leadership Matters: A Case Study to Improve Military Specialists' Employee Retention Rates," The International Journal of Ethical Leadership : Vol. 5, Article 17. Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/ijel/vol5/iss1/17

Since February 29, 2020

Included in

Applied Ethics Commons , Business Law, Public Responsibility, and Ethics Commons , Leadership Studies Commons , Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons

• Journal Home
• About This Journal
• Aims & Scope
• Editorial Board
• The International Journal of Ethical Leadership Special Volumes
• Submit Article
• Most Popular Papers
• Receive Email Notices or RSS

Advanced Search

ISSN: 2326-7461

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement (legal notice)

Privacy Copyright

All examples have been anonymised where appropriate.

We supported a service woman in the RAF who reported her Line Manager for several very serious acts of sexual harassment. When she raised a complaint about his behaviour, he decided to formally reprimand her for an alleged workplace failing that had taken place months before (and long before she had raised her complaint). The RAF also insisted he remain her 1st Reporting Officer for purposes of her annual appraisal, while he was under investigation for harassing her. It turns out a number of other young women had expressed concerns about his conduct too.  We supported her in her Service Complaint and Employment Tribunal claim. An apology was given and compensation was paid.  She has since left the RAF.

You can read more about her case here:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-68168403

Our client, Dwight Pile-Gray, has won his Employment Tribunal claim against the Army. The Tribunal found that he suffered direct race discrimination, harassment and victimisation. The  BBC  has reported his case, as has the Times, here:  https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/racism-prejudice-british-army-interview-9pg9vjplv

The full judgment of the Employment Tribunal can be read here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/66190c13c1d297c6ad1dfe41/Mr_D_Pile-Gray_-v-_Ministry_of_Defence_-_2200649-2022.pdf

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jul/03/british-army-admits-soldier-was-victim-of-anti-islamic-bias

An RLC soldier, our client Mr Bayo won his claim against the Army for religious discrimination. The Guardian reported the case, above.

Our blog here: https://centreformilitaryjustice.org.uk/religious-and-racial-discrimination-in-the-army/

Our case of H v Ministry of Defence was reported in the Daily Mail here:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11585187/Female-RAF-Corporal-wins-sex-abuse-tribunal-court-martial-clears-male-colleague-abused-her.html

And Times, here:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/molested-raf-corporal-set-for-payout-pvzb593sq

It is important because, despite her assailant being acquitted of sexual assault by penetration at court martial, H was able to persuade the Employment Tribunal that her assailant had done what she had alleged, and that the RAF was responsible for it, because it had occurred ‘during the course of her employment’.

Despite accepting that the male corporal had sexually assaulted her, the RAF allowed him to continue serving in the RAF until late 2022 when he was permitted to leave at his own request (and presumably with all attendant benefits). He was not dismissed in disgrace. And despite professing to have a ‘zero tolerance’ approach to sexual harassment and assault, the RAF/MoD are now appealing the judgment.

H was represented by Emma Norton of the CMJ and Nicola Braganza KC at Garden Court Chambers.

The Ministry of Defence can no longer discriminate against veterans on the grounds of their disability and the Equality Act 2010 as presently drafted breaches disabled veterans’ human rights, an Employment Tribunal has ruled 

PRESS RELEASE

T v Ministry of Defence –  Employment Tribunal judgment, 8 December 2021.

The claim was brought by a Royal Naval veteran, T, who served in the Royal Navy between 2014 and 2018.  She suffered serious sexual harassment and bullying during her time in service and left the Navy with serious mental health conditions. In 2017, she made a formal complaint (‘Service Complaint’) that she had been subjected to serious sexual harassment by two senior Naval officers and that, when she had tried to address this, she had been ostracised and bullied. Her Service Complaint was not progressed for years. At the time of writing, the independent Service Complaints Ombudsman for the Armed Forces has made no less than three findings that the Navy has subjected T to serious and unjustified delay in the handing of her Service Complaint, and the final resolution of her Service Complaint remains outstanding, more than four years after it was made.  T argued that the approach taken by the Navy to her Service Complaint was flawed and discriminatory. In particular, she argued that the Navy was under a legal duty to make reasonable adjustments for her as a disabled person.  In light of her mental health conditions, she argued that it was required to resolve her Service Complaint within a reasonable period of time and its failure to do so exposed her to further harm. The MoD argued that there was no such duty and that T was barred from bringing her claim of disability discrimination before the Tribunal, because the Armed Forces were completely exempt from the disability provisions in the Equality Act.

The Equality Act 2010 on the face of it does provide a complete exemption to the Armed Forces so that they may discriminate against all service personnel on the grounds of their disability. This is stated to be necessary in the interests of ensuring the combat effectiveness of the Armed Forces.

T challenged the scope of this exemption, arguing that veterans were in a different position to serving service personnel. They would not be required to deploy or engage in combat, because they had left service, and so the principle of combat effectiveness could not possibly justify the exemption and the MoD should not be permitted to discriminate against them on the grounds of their disability.

In a landmark ruling, extending the rights of disabled ex-service men and women, the Tribunal agreed with T.  It has ruled that the Equality Act as currently drafted breached T’s human rights in that it prevented her from bringing a disability discrimination claim against the MoD after she had left the Navy.  The Tribunal decided that it had not been the intention of Parliament to include disabled veterans in the blanket exemption and the need to preserve combat effectiveness could not possibly apply to them. The Tribunal decided that it was possible to interpret the Equality Act so that the exemption from the disability provisions only affected serving service personnel, not veterans.

The judgment may have wider repercussions for veterans, a significant number of whom may have disabilities. After they leave service, veterans may still need to have considerable contact with the Armed Forces or MoD. For example: they may need to seek reviews of their pension arrangements; they may need to apply to the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme because they have sustained injury during service; or, as in this case, they may have a Service Complaint that, because of the well-known serious delays inherent in that system, remains outstanding and continues long after they have left. If a disabled veteran believes that, post-service, the MoD has discriminated against them on the basis of their disability, or has failed to make reasonable adjustments for them to address any substantial disadvantage they may suffer (as compared to a non-disabled person), they may now be able to bring a claim.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/nov/28/deepcut-deaths-army-treating-victims-families-with-contempt

The Guardian reported the successful outcome to the Benton family’s threat of judicial review against the Army for it’s failure to act upon assurances given at the inquest into the death of Pte Sean Benton.

Sean was the first of the young soldiers to die at Deepcut barracks in Surrey. At his inquest in 2018, the Army promised the Coroner that it would ensure all trainees were informed they report to the civilian police if they were abused. On the basis of that assurance, the Coroner declined to make a ‘Prevention of Future Deaths’ report.

The Benton family wanted to be sure the Army had acted on the assurances it had given to the Coroner. So we made various enquiries, culminating in a formal letter before action, threatening to take them to the High Court. It transpired the Army had not done what it had said it would do.  They have formally apologised to the family and have taken steps – very belatedly – to correct the position.

We acted for the family. Counsel was Jesse Nicholls from Matrix Chambers.

‘Service Complaints are by definition when things are going wrong for a soldier and the raising of a Service Complaint may be thought of as a potential risk factor’. Senior Coroner for Berkshire.

The inquest into the death of LCpl Joel Robinson was heard b efore the Senior Coroner for Berkshire  between 9-11 November 2021. The CMJ’s lawyer, Emma Norton, and counsel Adam Payter of 6KBW College Hill acted for Joel’s mother Angela Robinson.

An excerpt of a BBC interview with the family’s solicitor can be heard here:

LCpl Joel Robinson died on 25 March 2019. He was 24 years old.

He served in the Household Cavalry. At the time of his death, he was based at Combermere Barracks in Windsor, although he had recently returned from Germany where he had been based since June 2017.

Joel’s mother, Angela Robinson, describes him as a warm, loyal, sociable young man with a wide circle of friends. He was a very gifted horseman and it was his passion for horses that had drawn him to the Army aged 16.

In the summer before he died Joel made a formal complaint alleging that he was being bullied, harassed, victimised and discriminated against by his Line Manager. The inquest has heard that Joel described being isolated, humiliated, ignored, that he suffered ‘bitter, bullying behaviour’ and that his boss had threatened to ‘kick his head in’. This had been going on for many months. Joel had tried repeatedly to raise his concerns with his chain of command.  He described feeling ‘so lonely and depressed’ and said that the manager had made his life ‘a living hell’. He told a friend that a less experienced soldier faced with this kind of behaviour might well have killed themselves.

Joel sent a copy of his complaint to his mother. He told his mother and his friends that he feared the impact on his career of having made the complaint. In September 2018, Joel told his mother that he was no longer going ahead with it.

The inquest heard evidence of multiple serious breaches of the Army’s policies on the handling of service complaints and bullying allegations, involving at least six senior officers.

Some months later, despite a glowing annual report and having been recommended for promotion, Joel was passed over for promotion and given what he considered to be a ‘punishment posting’.

He died from hanging in his accommodation block in the early hours of 25 March 2019. When he died, he was very heavily intoxicated and evidence was heard that his chain of command was aware that he was drinking heavily.

Both the medical witness and MoD witness at the inquest confirmed that they would have expected senior officers to have referred Joel to the welfare or medical teams for help. However that did not happen.

After he died, his mother asked the Army what had happened to her son’s complaint. The Adjutant told her that the Army had no record of Joel being bullied.  Despite evidence that Joel’s complaint was shared with and between senior officers both electronically and in hard copy, no explanation has ever been provided by the Army or the Ministry of Defence for its disappearance.

The Senior Coroner concluded that senior officers were ‘wholly or mostly unaware’ of the complaints policy; and that ‘no trace’ of Joel’s complaint had been found.  She expressed concern at the ‘passive’ approach of the Army to its suicide prevention work and stated her intention to issue formal ‘Prevention of Future Deaths’ reports addressing among other things, the timeline for the Army to conclude its suicide prevention programme, and the need to address a lack of awareness in the Army on how to handle Service Complaints. She said: ‘Service Complaints are by definition when things are going wrong for a soldier and the raising of a Service Complaint may be thought of as a potential risk factor’.

Joel’s mother Angela Robinson said:

‘Joel felt worthless, worn down and exhausted. His allegations of bullying had been dismissed and based on what I’ve heard at this inquest and what Joel told me himself, I believe he was discouraged from continuing with it.  Bullying complaints like his are just not taken seriously enough.  I remain shocked that the only reason my son’s bullying complaint came to light was because he sent a copy to me. The Army would never have produced it themselves. Joel was also drinking far too much and the culture of binge drinking in the Army is a huge problem. Young soldiers are not being offered help quickly enough and suicide rates seem to be going up and up. Joel was very badly let down. I am glad the Coroner will be writing to the head of the Army, and sincerely hope that lessons will be learned from this and I would like an opportunity sit down and talk to the MoD about Joel’s case.’

The family’s solicitor Emma Norton, from the  Centre for Military Justice , said:

‘This case has shone a much-needed spotlight on the experiences of young, vulnerable soldiers trying to raise serious complaints of bullying through their own chain of command. Joel’s complaint was not acted on properly and then appears to have simply disappeared. The Army and MoD will say, as they always do, that they do not tolerate bullying. But until they introduce a measure of independence into the complaints process – as was recommended by a  review  more than two years ago – sad cases like this are likely to recur.’

Notes to Editors

The  Service Complaints Ombudsman for the Armed Forces , has repeatedly found the service complaints process to be neither ‘efficient, effective or fair’.  In particular, the Ombudsman has warned of the persistent evidence she has received that soldiers are dissuaded from making complaints or warned that it would not be in the best interests of their career to make a complaint.

The Army has a formal complaints process, which can be accessed  here .  There is a formal bullying and harassment policy, which can be accessed  here .  The policies in place at the time required the chain of command to check in on complainants around three months after they had informally resolved a bullying complaint, to ensure the behaviour had not recurred; and for a record of the complaint to be retained on both the unit records and on the equality and diversity logs for up to ten years. That did not happen.

In July 2019, the  Wigston Review Into Inappropriate Behaviours  recommended that responsibility for the investigation of serious service complaints alleging bullying, harassment and discrimination should be taken away from the single services’ chain of command and held by a new centralised Defence Authority. Despite initially stating that it accepted that recommendation, the Ministry of Defence has since resiled from it and confirmed that serious service complaints shall remain the responsibility of the single services themselves.

The family was represented by Emma Norton, solicitor at the  Centre for Military Justice  and Adam Payter, counsel, of  6KBW College Hill

The CMJ is acting for three claimants that are challenging the MoD’s policy governing service personnel’s contact with the media or with Parliament.

The claimants are three service women that wish to speak out about sexual assault, sexual harassment, sexism and racism.  The policy prevents them from doing so without first seeking the consent of the very institution they wish to criticise.

In this way, the policy amounts to a violation of their right to freedom of expression.

A blog and some press coverage of the case can be accessed here:

Service personnel should be allowed to exercise their right to freedom of speech to help bring about reform

Alicia was the victim of a serious sexual assault in 2015. It was investigated by the service police, prosecuted by the Service Prosecuting Authority (SPA) and went to Court Martial. The case collapsed following serious failures on the part of the SPA prosecutor. It turned out that the prosecutor was the same prosecutor that had badly mishandled the case of the late Cpl Anne-Marie Ellement years before and which had, the Ellement family had been assured, resulted in important changes being made to the way such cases would be handled in the future. The CMJ acted for Alicia in her civil claim against the SPA, on the basis that her right to a competent and thorough investigation (including prosecution) of her allegation of sexual assault, as protected by Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Human Rights Act) had been violated. The claim settled out of court in 2020. The BBC reported the case here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54614232

The Ellement family supported Alicia in bringing the claim and they have worked together to highlight the wider failures it revealed. Alicia’s experiences are yet further evidence of the need for fundamental reform to the way in which the military handles sexual assault cases. The Ellement family and Alicia are calling for all such cases, where they are alleged to have happened in the UK, to be handled by the civilian justice system.

The Centre for Military Justice acted for three women who reported being raped while serving. Their cases were handled in the Service Justice System and were not investigated by civilian police, handled by the CPS or sent to Crown Court. They challenged the handling of these cases inside the Armed Forces and, in particular, the MoD’s recent rejection of a recommendation by a senior retired judge and former chief constable that all cases of rape should be handed over to civilian authorities.

The women relied on the Human Rights Act and the Equality Act.

In light of the judicial review, the Secretary of State said in June 2020 that he would give ‘fresh consideration’ to the matter.

Following that re-consideration, which took place over the summer and autumn of 2020, the Secretary of State determined that the matter of jurisdiction should now be placed on a statutory footing and would now be included within the Armed Forces Bill. He also agreed to review all of the internal policies and protocols governing the handling of sexual offences. The litigants insisted that a fresh Defence Instruction Notice (DIN) should be issued that would require all service personnel to be informed of their right to report any matter to the civilian police. This was initially refused by the Secretary of State, however upon the litigants’ refusal to agree a consent order in the case, the Secretary of State agreed to issue a new DIN.

The judicial review was settled on the basis that the Secretary of State agreed to place the matter before Parliament (which subsequently happened when the Armed Forces Bill was published (see Clause 7)), to consult with the public, and to review all the internal policies on the handling of sexual offences.  

L/Cpl Bernard Mongan’s body was found in his room at Catterick Garrison at the end of January 2020.

His body had lain in his room, undiscovered, for 3 weeks before he was found. Bernie had been badly assaulted by two fellow soldiers at the end of 2018, and a police investigation was still ongoing when he died. Bernie told his wife that he was being bullied. A Service Inquiry reported to the family in July 2021 and was reported here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57791039 and here: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/bullied-soldier-who-lay-dead-24506635

The report says that “failings in the proper management of personnel led to the delay in the discovery of L/Cpl Mongan”. The report also states that Bernie’s complaints of bullying and concerns about his welfare had not been properly investigated or passed on. The panel which carried out the inquiry concluded that its report “makes for sobering reading”.

Because Bernie was left for so long, the family do not have a cause of death and the Coroner has opened an inquest.

The family has many questions about how Bernie died, whether the bullying or assault had anything to do with his death and how it was that he was left in his room on barracks, alone, for so long, with no-one in the Army apparently noticing or reporting him as missing.

A serving soldier who was the victim of sexual assault threatened judicial review proceedings against the MoD for its failure to institute a system of independent oversight of the Service Police, equivalent to the civilian system of police oversight. As a consequence of her judicial review, the MoD agreed to conduct a review of the system of service police oversight, the outcome of which was published in February 2020. The MoD states that it now accepts in principle the need for independent oversight of service policing and will consider the review’s proposals (for the creation of a ‘niche’ body) in more detail. Our blog on the review’s outcome can be found under News, above, dated 28 February 2020.

A serving soldier was the victim of a sexual assault. She threatened judicial review proceedings against the MoD, challenging the statutory power of a Commanding Officer to investigate for him/herself an allegation of sexual assault and the exclusion of sexual assault from the list of alleged crimes that had to be referred to the (service) police.  This issue had been raised with the MoD by the families of the late Cpl Anne-Marie Ellement and the late Pte Cheryl James but had not resulted in the requested changes to the legislation. Following her letter before action, the MoD finally agreed to amend the legislation and it is now compulsory for all commanding officers to refer all allegations of sexual assault to the Service Police. 

A former sailor, forced out of the Royal Navy because of his sexuality in 1995, was stripped of his Long Service and Good Conduct Medal and his Good Conduct Badges. Now elderly and in poor health, he asked to have them restored. Notwithstanding the lifting of the ban on LGBT people serving in the Armed Forces, the MoD refused. Judicial review proceedings were brought following which the MoD agreed to return the badges and medal, and to bring in a new policy which would allow other LGBT former service personnel to apply to have their medals restored. You can see more about his story on this BBC article

Joe is now working closely with the CMJ to ensure the promised policy is finalised as soon as possible so that other veterans may benefit from it. The CMJ is working with our partners to explore whether there are other, additional ways the MoD can support its LGBT veterans. 

A soldier, Anna, reported a rape by a fellow male soldier but, following what she considered to be an inadequate service police investigation, her alleged assailant was not charged by the Service Prosecution Authority. After the SPA confirmed that it was not going to charge the alleged assailant, Anna’s Commanding Officer informed her that she would now be investigated under the Army’s own internal administrative procedures (known as ‘AGAI’) to determine if she had breached the so-called ‘Service Test’. This meant that she would have to undergo further interviews, investigation and other processes arising from the alleged rape and on the basis that her own conduct was now being called into question. 

A soldier, Sarah, reported being sexually assaulted by a male soldier in her unit. The Service Police did not conduct an adequate investigation in several respects. This included the proposal, by the Royal Military Police, that Sarah agree to the alleged assailant admitting to the lesser charge of common assault, rather than the sexual assault with which he had been charged. Sarah lodged a formal complaint about various aspects of the conduct of the Service Police. While an apology was eventually offered and some organisational changes were made, the Professional Standards Unit declined to take any further action on the basis that the principle RMP soldier responsible had by then left the unit. The RMP failures in this case led, in the client’s firm opinion, to the male soldier being acquitted at Court Martial. When he acquitted the defendant, the Judge Advocate made very critical remarks about the RMP.

A soldier, Mary, reported being raped by a male soldier in her chain of command. The soldier she accused was acquitted at trial. However, Mary wanted to lodge a service complaint concerning the sustained sexual harassment she had suffered at the hands of the soldier before the alleged assault and the way in which her chain of command had treated her after her report of rape and while she waited for her case to come to court.  Her service complaint was dismissed at the first stage but upheld almost entirely on appeal. A formal apology was offered, compensation was paid and it was accepted that the response of the Army to the entire situation had cost Mary her extremely promising career.

The Director’s previous inquest cases include:

Inquest touching the death of Pte Sean Benton (Deepcut barracks) . Verdict here: https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/sites/default/files/BENTON%20-%20FINDINGS.pdf  

Press release here:  https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/news/press-releases-and-statements/liberty-calls-civilian-police-investigate-all-military-crimes-0

Inquest touching the death of Pte Cheryl James (Deepcut barracks). Verdict here: https://digitalpressoffice.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/cj-finalconclusions.pdf

Press release here: https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/news/press-releases-and-statements/cheryl-james-verdict-liberty-calls-reform-tackle-pervasive

Legal representation and advocacy support to the family of Pte James Collinson (Deepcut barracks). More information here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-49114731

Inquest touching the death of Cpl Anne-Marie Ellement. Press coverage: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/03/anne-marie-ellement-inquest-mod-care-vulnerable ; https://www.channel4.com/news/anne-marie-ellement-inquest-suicide-bullying-rape ; https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/10672553/Cpl-Anne-Marie-Ellement-Army-apologises-as-coroner-finds-bullying-was-suicide-factor.html

Inquests into the deaths of Rfn Darren Mitchell and C/Cpl James Ross. Press coverage: https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/army-must-do-more-to-support-soldiers-in-distress-say-families-horrified-by-ballykinler-inquest-evidence-37862853.html

Counselors and the Military: When Protocol and Ethics Conflict

Article , Volume 4 - Issue 2

Elizabeth A. Prosek, Jessica M. Holm

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and TRICARE have approved professional counselors to work within the military system. Counselors need to be aware of potential ethical conflicts between counselor ethical guidelines and military protocol. This article examines confidentiality, multiple relationships and cultural competency, as well as ethical models to navigate potential dilemmas with veterans. The first model describes three approaches for navigating the ethical quandaries: military manual approach, stealth approach, and best interest approach. The second model describes 10-stages to follow when navigating ethical dilemmas. A case study is used for analysis. 

Keywords: military, ethics, veterans, counselors, competency, confidentiality

The American Community Survey (ACS; U.S. Census Bureau, 2011) estimated that 21.5 million veterans live in the United States. A reported 1.6 million veterans served in the Gulf War operations that began post-9/11 in 2001 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2011). Gulf War post-9/11 veterans served mainly in Iraq and Afghanistan, in operations including but not limited to Operations Enduring Freedom (OEF), Iraqi Freedom (OIF), and New Dawn (OND) (M. E. Otey, personal communication, October 23, 2012). Holder (2007) estimated that veterans represent 10% of the total U.S. population ages 17 years and older. Pre-9/11 data suggested that 11% of military service members utilized mental health services in the year 2000 (Garvey Wilson, Messer, & Hoge, 2009). In 2003, post-9/11 comparative data reported that 19% of veterans deployed to Iraq accessed mental health services within one year of return (Hoge, Auchterlonie, & Milliken, 2006). Recognizing the increased need for mental health assessment, the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) mandated the Post-Deployment Health Assessment (PDHA) for all returning service members (Hoge et al., 2006). The PDHA is a brief three-page self-report screening of symptoms to include post-traumatic stress, depression, suicidal ideation and aggression (U.S. DOD, n.d.). The assessment also indicates service member self-report interest in accessing mental health services.

Military service members access mental health services for a variety of reasons. In a qualitative study of veterans who accessed services at a Veterans Affairs (VA) mental health clinic, 48% of participants reported seeking treatment because of relational problems, and 44% sought treatment because of anger and/or irritable mood (Snell & Tusaie, 2008). Veterans may also present with mental health symptoms related to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, and suicidal ideation (Hoge et al., 2006). Depression is considered a common risk factor of suicide among the general population, and veterans are additionally at risk due to combat exposure (Martin, Ghahramanlou-Holloway, Lou, & Tucciarone, 2009). The DOD (2012) confirmed that 165 active-duty Army service members committed suicide in 2011. Furthermore, researchers asserted that suicide caused service member deaths more often than combat (O’Gorman, 2012). Hoge et al. (2004) reported that veterans were most likely to access mental health services 3 – 4 months post-deployment. Unfortunately, researchers suggested that service members were hesitant to access mental health treatment, citing the stigma of labels (Kim, Britt, Klocko, Riviere, & Adler, 2011). Studies indicated that mental health service needs are underestimated among the military population and are therefore a potential burden to an understaffed helping profession (Garvey Wilson et al., 2009; Hoge et al., 2006). In May of 2013, the DOD and VA created 1,400 new positions for mental health providers to serve military personnel (DOD, 2013). Moreover, as of March 2013, the DOD-sponsored veterans crisis line reported more than 800,000 calls (DOD, 2013). It is evident that the veteran population remains at risk for problems related to optimal mental health functioning and therefore requires assistance from trained helping professionals.

Historically, the DOD employed social workers and psychologists almost exclusively to provide mental health services in the military setting. Recently, the DOD and VA expanded services and created more positions for mental health clinicians (U.S. VA, 2012). Because licensed professional counselors (LPCs) are now employable by VA service providers (e.g., VA hospitals) and approved TRICARE providers (Barstow & Terrazas, 2012), it is imperative to develop an understanding of the military system, especially of the potential conflict that may exist between military protocol and counselor ethical guidelines. The military health system requires mental health professionals to be appropriately credentialed (e.g., licensed), and credentialing results in the mandatory adherence to a set of professional ethical standards (Johnson, Grasso, & Maslowski, 2010). However, there may be times when professional ethical standards do not align with military regulations. Thus, an analysis of the counselor ethical codes relevant to the military population is presented. At times, discrepancies between military protocol and counselor ethical codes may emerge; therefore, recommendations for navigating such ethical dilemmas are provided. A case study and analysis from the perspective of two ethical decision-making models are presented.

Ethical Considerations for Counselors

The mission of the American Counseling Association (ACA) Code of Ethics (2005) is to establish a set of standards for professional counselors, which ensure that the counseling profession continues to enhance the profession and quality of care with regard to diversity. As professional counselors become employed by various VA mental health agencies or apply for TRICARE provider status, it is important to identify specific ethical codes relevant to the military population. Therefore, three categories of ethical considerations pertinent to working with military service members are presented: confidentiality, multiple relationships, and cultural competence.

Confidentiality

The ACA Code of Ethics (2005) suggests that informed consent (A.2.a., p. 4) be a written and verbal discussion of rights and responsibilities in the counseling relationship. This document includes the client right for confidentiality (B.1.c., p. 7) with explanation of limitations (B.1.d., p. 7). The limitations, or exceptions, to confidentiality include harm to self, harm to others and illegal substance use. In the military setting, counselors may need to consider other exceptions to confidentiality including domestic violence (Reger, Etherage, Reger, & Gahm, 2008), harassment, criminal activity and areas associated with fitness for duty (Kennedy & Johnson, 2009). Also, military administrators may require mandated reporting when service members are referred for substance abuse treatment (Reger et al., 2008). When these conditions arise in counseling, the military may require reporting beyond the standard ethical protocol to which counselors are accustomed.

Counselors working in the VA mental health system or within TRICARE may need to be flexible with informed consent documents, depending on the purpose of services sought. Historically, veterans represented those who returned from deployment and stayed home. Currently, military members may serve multiple tours of combat duty; therefore, the definition of veterans now includes active-duty personnel. This modern definition of veteran speaks to issues of fitness for duty, where the goal is to return service members ready for combat. Informed consent documents may need to outline disclosures to commanding officers. For example, if a service member is in need of a Command-Directed Evaluation (CDE), then the commander is authorized to see the results of the assessment (Reger et al., 2008). Fitness for duty is also relevant when service members are mandated to the Soldier Readiness Program (SRP) to determine their readiness for deployment. In these situations, counselors need to clearly explain the exception to confidentiality before conducting the assessment. Depending on the type of agency and its connection to the DOD, active-duty veterans’ health records may be considered government property, not the property of the service provider (McCauley, Hacker Hughes, & Liebling-Kalifani, 2008). It is imperative that counselors are educated on the protocols of the setting or assessments, because “providing feedback to a commander in the wrong situation can be an ethical violation that is reviewable by a state licensing authority” (Reger et al., 2008, p. 30). Thus, in order to protect the client and the counselor, limitations to confidentiality within the military setting must be accurately observed at all times. Knowledge of appropriate communication between the counselor and military system also speaks to the issue of multiple relationships.

Multiple Relationships

Kennedy and Johnson (2009) suggested creating collaborative relationships with interdisciplinary teams in a military setting in order to create a network of consultants (e.g., lawyers, psychologists, psychiatrists), which is consistent with ACA ethical code D.1.b to develop interdisciplinary relationships (2005, p. 11). However, when interdisciplinary teams are formed, there are ACA (2005) ethical guidelines that must be considered. These guidelines state that interdisciplinary teams must focus on collaboratively helping the client by utilizing the knowledge of each professional on the team (D.1.c., p. 11). Counselors also must make the other members of the team aware of the constraints of confidentiality that may arise (D.1.d., p. 11). In addition, counselors should adhere to employer policies (D.1.g., p. 11), openly communicating with VA superiors to navigate potential discrepancies between employers’ expectations and counselors’ roles in best helping the client.

In the military environment, case transfers are common because of  the high incidence of client relocation, which increases the need for the interdisciplinary teams to develop time-sensitive treatment plans (Reger et al., 2008). Therefore, treatment plans not only need to follow the guidelines of A.1.c., in which counseling plans “offer reasonable promise of success and are consistent with abilities and circumstances of clients” (ACA, 2005, p. 4), but they also need to reflect brief interventions or treatment modalities that can be easily transferred to a new professional. Mental health professionals may work together to best utilize their specialized services in order to meet the needs of military service members in a minimal time allowance.

For those working with military service members, consideration of multiple relationships in terms of client caseload also is important. Service members who work together within the same unit may seek mental health services at the same agency. Members of a military unit may be considered a support network which, according to ethical code A.1.d., may be used as a resource for the client and/or counselor (ACA, 2005, p. 4). However, learning about a military unit as a network from multiple member perspectives may also create a dilemma. Service members within a unit may be tempted to probe the counselor for information about other service members, or tempt the counselor to become involved in the unit dynamic. McCauley et al. (2008) recommended that mental health professionals avoid mediating conflicts between service members in order to remain neutral in the agency setting.

However, there are times when the unit cohesion may be used to support the therapeutic relationship. Basic military training for service members emphasizes the value of teamwork and the collective mind as essential to success (Strom et al., 2012). It is important for counselors to approach military service member clients from this perspective, not from a traditional Western individualistic lens. Mental health professionals also are warned not to be discouraged if rapport is more challenging to build than expected. Hall (2011) suggested that the importance of secrecy in the military setting might make it more difficult for service members to readily share in the therapeutic relationship. Researchers noted that military service members easily built rapport with each other in a group therapy session, often leaving out the civilian group leader (Strom et al., 2012). It might behoove counselors to build upon the framework of collectivism in order to earn the trust of members of the military population. Navigating the dynamic of a unit or the population of service members accessing care at the agency may be a challenge; however, counselors are able to alleviate this challenge with increased knowledge of the military culture in general.

Cultural Competence

The military population represents a group of people with a unique “language, a code of manners, norms of behavior, belief systems, dress, and rituals” and therefore can be considered a cultural group (Reger et al., 2008, p. 22). Reger et al. (2008) suggested that many clinical psychologists learned about military culture as active service members themselves. While there may be many veterans currently working as professional counselors, civilian counselors also serve the mental health needs of the military population; and as civilians, they require further training. The ACA Code of Ethics (2005) suggests that counselors communicate with their clients in ways that are culturally appropriate to ensure understanding (A.2.c., p. 4). This can be achieved by prolonged exposure to military culture or by seeking supervision from a professional involved with the military mental health system (Reger et al., 2008). Strom et al. (2012) outlined examples of military-specific cultural components for professionals to learn: importance of rank, unique terminology and value of teamwork. It behooves counselors intending to work with the military population to learn terminology in order to understand service members. For example, R&R refers to vacation leave and MOS or rate refers to a job category (Strom et al., 2012).

Personal values may cause dilemmas for a mental health professional working within the VA system. This can be especially true during times of war. Stone (2008) suggested that treating veterans of past wars may be easier than working with military service members during current combat because politics may be intensified. A counselor who does not support the current wartime mission may be conflicted when clients are mandated to return to active-duty assignments (Stone, 2008). The ACA Code of Ethics (2005) addresses the impact of counselors’ personal values (A.4.b., pp. 4 – 5) on the therapeutic relationship. It is recommended that counselors be aware of their own values and beliefs and respect the diversity of their clients. Counselors need to find a way to value the contributions of their client when personal or political opinion conflicts with the DOD’s plans or efforts overseas. If one wants to be successful with this population, Johnson (2008) suggested the foundational importance of accepting the military mission. If this is in direct conflict with the counselor’s values, it may be recommended for the counselor to consider the client’s value of the mission.

The ACA ethical code stresses the importance of mental health professionals practicing within the boundaries of their competence and continuing to broaden their knowledge to work with diverse clients (ACA, 2005, C.2.a., p. 9). Counselors should only develop new specialty areas after appropriate training and supervised experience (ACA, 2005, C.2.b., p. 9). Working within the VA mental health system, mental health professionals may be asked to provide a service in which they are not competent (Kennedy & Johnson, 2009). Such a request may occur more frequently here than in other settings, due to the high demand of mental health services and low availability of trained professionals (Garvey Wilson et al., 2009; Hoge et al., 2006). Counselors must determine if their experience and training can be generalized to working with military service members (Kennedy & Johnson, 2009), and may be their own best advocate for receiving appropriate training.

Awareness of when and how military service members access mental health services also might be important to consider. Reger et al. (2008) reported that military personnel were more likely to access services before and after a deployment. Researchers specified a higher prevalence rate of access 3 – 4 months after a deployment (Hoge et al., 2004). The relationship of time between deployment and help-seeking behaviors suggests that counselors should be prepared for issues related to trauma. For women, combat-related trauma is compounded with increased rates of reported military sexual trauma (Kelly et al., 2008). Counselors would benefit from additional trainings in trauma intervention strategies. The VA and related military organizations offer many resources online to educate professionals working with military members with identified trauma symptoms (U.S. VA., n.d.).

Advocating for appropriate training in areas of incompetence is the responsibility of the professional, who should pursue such training in order to best meet the needs of the military population. It is best practice for mental health professionals to be engaged in ongoing trainings to ensure utilization of the latest protocols and treatment modalities (McCauley et al., 2008). Trainings may need to extend beyond general military culture, because each branch of service (e.g., Army, Marines, Navy) could be considered a cultural subgroup with unique language and standards. For example, service members in the Army are soldiers, whereas members of the Navy are sailors (Strom et al., 2012).

This article has outlined many ACA (2005) ethical guidelines pertinent to working with the military population. However, as presented, there are times when counselor ethical codes conflict with military regulations. Counselors interested in working in the military setting or with military personnel may consider decision-making models to address ethical dilemmas.

Recommendations for Counselors

The military mental health system has almost exclusively employed psychologists and social workers. Counselors interested in employment within VA agencies or as TRICARE providers may utilize the resources created by these practitioners to better serve the military population. Two ethical decision-making models are presented, and a case study is provided to demonstrate how to implement the models.

Ethical Models

The ACA Code of Ethics (2005) advises counselors to adhere to the code of ethics whenever possible, working towards a resolution of the conflict (H.1.b., p. 19). If a favorable resolution cannot be formed, counselors have the choice to act in accordance with the law or regulation. Psychology researchers have suggested ethical models for professionals to use during times of dilemma within the military setting. The first model presented considers three overarching approaches to address ethical dilemmas; and the second model presented is a more specific stage model with which to approach dilemmas. These models may serve to assist counselors as the counseling profession gains more experience in the VA system and eventually develops counselor-specific decision-making models.

Approach model. Johnson and Wilson (1993) identified three approaches for psychologists to consider when navigating the ethical quandaries of the military mental health system. The first, the military manual approach , occurs when professionals adhere strictly to military regulations without consideration for the specific client’s needs. The second, the stealth approach , occurs when there is strict adherence to the mental health professionals’ code of ethics, regardless of the legalities surrounding the circumstances. While the client’s best interests may be at the forefront in this approach, the counselor must also take into account the possibility of being the subject of legal action for not adhering to the standards set by the military. For example, the counselor may use ambiguous wording within the client file or leave some information out altogether, so that if the files were requested, the client’s information would be protected (Johnson & Wilson, 1993). The third, the best interest approach , occurs when the counselor maintains focus on the client’s best interest while also adhering to the standards of the military. This may require professionals to adhere to the minimum professional standards in order to accommodate the client’s best interest. Although most professionals have deemed this approach the best option, it also leads to the most ambiguity. Under certain circumstances, the counselor also must take into account what is in the best interest for society as a whole, while also navigating a responsibility to the client and the military mental health system. Researchers in psychology responded to the ambiguity of this model by developing a more specific stage model to assist professionals with ethical dilemmas.

Stage model. Barnett and Johnson (2008) proposed a 10-stage model to follow when navigating an ethical dilemma. They advise that professionals must do the following:

1.   Clearly define the situation.

2.   Determine what parties could be affected.

3.   Reference the pertinent ethical codes.

4.   Reference the pertinent laws and regulations.

5.   Reflect on personal thoughts and competencies on the issue.

6.   Select knowledgeable colleagues with whom to consult.

7.   Develop alternate courses of action.

8.   Evaluate the impact on all parties involved.

9.   Consult with professional organizations, ethics committees and colleagues.

10. Decide on a course of action.

Barnett and Johnson (2008) also noted that once a decision is made, the process does not end. It is best practice to monitor the implications and, if necessary, modify the plan. Documentation throughout this entire process is necessary for the protection of the counselor, the client and other involved stakeholders. Counselors working in the military mental health system may find this 10-stage model helpful when navigating ethical dilemmas.

To better understand the implementation of the two presented ethical decision-making models, a case study was developed. The case is then conceptualized from both the approach model and stage model, and the ethical dilemmas associated with the case are discussed.

Megan is a licensed professional counselor employed at a clinic that serves military service members. She provides individual outpatient counseling to veterans and family members, as well as facilitates veteran support groups. Megan’s client, Robert, is a Petty Officer First Class in the Navy. Robert is married with two children. In recent sessions, Megan became concerned with Robert’s increased alcohol use. Recently, Robert described a weekend of heavy drinking at the local bar. Although Robert drove after leaving the bar both nights, Megan suspected that he was not sober enough to drive. In a follow-up session, Robert reported that his binge-drinking weekend caused friction at home with his wife, and that he missed his children’s soccer games. During his most recent session, Robert was visibly distressed as he disclosed to Megan that he received orders for a deployment in 3 months. Robert is anxious about informing his wife and children of the pending 6-month deployment, as he knows it will only increase conflict at home. Robert reported that his family could use the increase in pay associated with family separation and tax-free wages during deployment. However, he also knows that deployments cause tension with his wife, which has already increased due to Robert’s recent drinking binges. While leaving the session, he mentioned with a laugh that he would rather go to the bar than go home.

Analysis from approach model. Megan may consider using Johnson and Wilson’s (1993) ethical approach model as she conceptualizes the potential ethical dilemma presented in Robert’s case. From a military manual approach, Megan may need to report Robert’s recent alcohol abuse behavior to his superior, as it may impact his fitness for duty on his next deployment. And although Robert has not been caught drinking and driving or charged with a crime, his behavior also puts him at risk of military conduct violations. However, when Robert originally came to the clinic, he did so of his own accord, not under orders, which could mean that notifying a commanding officer is an ethical violation. In consideration of the stealth approach, Megan may review the ACA (2005) ethical guidelines and conclude that there are no violations at risk if she chooses not to report Robert’s drinking habits. However, Megan contemplates whether addressing Robert’s drinking binges is in his best interest overall. She understands that the money associated with deployment is important to Robert’s family at this time; however, his drinking may put him at increased risk during deployment. Finally, Megan applies the best-interest approach to Robert’s situation. Megan may refer Robert to the center’s substance use support group. This referral will be reflected in Robert’s records, but if he begins receiving treatment for his alcohol abuse now (3 months before deployment), there may be time for Robert to demonstrate significant progress before his fitness for duty assessment.

Analysis from stage model. Megan may consider her ethical dilemma from Barnett and Johnson’s (2008) 10-stage model. In stage 1, she clearly defines the situation as Robert’s alcohol abuse and pending deployment. In stage 2, Megan considers who may be affected in this situation. She understands that Robert’s family would benefit from the extra money associated with the deployment, and therefore the family may be impacted if Robert is not deployed. Megan also notes that the family is already negatively impacted by his recent drinking binge (e.g., conflict with his wife, missed soccer games). If Robert’s problematic drinking continues, he is at risk for evaluation and promotion issues. In stage 3, Megan reflects upon the ACA (2005) ethical codes in order to better understand her dilemma from a counselor’s view. Robert has a right to confidentiality (B.1.c., p. 7) with limitations including illegal substance use (B.1.d., p. 7). However, Robert’s current substance is alcohol, which is a legal substance. Megan considers the importance of his support network (A.1.d., p. 4) including his family and unit, but she does not have the ethical right to disclose her concerns about his substance abuse. In stage 4, Megan considers the pertinent laws and regulations of the dilemma. As per the clinic regulations, she is aware that if she makes a substance use program referral, it will be reflected in Robert’s record, which is the property of the military. Megan also is aware that Robert has not committed a documented crime of driving under the influence.

In stage 5 of the 10-stage ethical decision-making model, Megan must reflect on her personal thoughts and competencies. She is very concerned about Robert’s increased use of alcohol and is worried for his safety if deployed. Megan feels less confident in her ability to accurately assess for substance use problems. She facilitates the PTSD support group for the clinic, which is her specialty area. Megan recognizes that she is fond of Robert as a client and is disappointed that he could be jeopardizing his family and career with his alcohol abuse. She considers whether she is overreacting to his binge-drinking incident because of her higher expectations of him. In stage 6, Megan consults with her colleague who leads the substance use support groups at the clinic. She describes Robert’s recent abuse of alcohol and inquires as to whether he is a good candidate for the substance use group, needs more intense treatment, or needs no treatment at all. The colleague suggests that the group would be a very appropriate fit for someone with Robert’s symptoms.

In stage 7, Megan develops her course of action to refer Robert to the substance use group. Then, in stage 8, she evaluates the plan for potential impact on parties involved. Megan conceptualizes that Robert may be at risk for losing his deployment orders if he is accessing substance use treatment. Megan believes she has reduced this potential impact by referring to the substance support group, rather than an inpatient treatment facility, which may be more appropriate for a dependence issue. Megan recognizes that attending a 90-minute group each week will take Robert away from his family, but she also realizes that the 90-minute commitment is less than his current time spent away from the family when binge drinking. Megan reflects upon how her therapeutic relationship with Robert may be strained at the time of referral, and is prepared for a potential negative response from her client. She trusts in their therapeutic relationship and moves forward. In stage 9, Megan presents her planned course of action to her supervisor at the clinic. The supervisor approves the referral for the support group, but also suggests that Megan consider a referral to couples counseling for Robert and his wife, which may assist with resolving conflicts before the deployment.

In the final stage, Megan proposes the treatment plan of action to Robert in their next session. Megan explains that she feels ethically obligated to refer Robert to the substance use support group, and that as of now, Robert may make this choice for himself. Megan and Robert discuss the potential that substance use treatment may no longer be a choice in the future if his current drinking behavior continues. There is more discussion of fitness for duty and how participation in the support group will positively reflect upon the assessment in the future. Megan also presents Robert with the recommendation of couples counseling to help mediate relationship conflicts before deployment. She reports that if Robert and his wife decide to receive couples counseling, she can provide a referral for them at that time.

With the ethical decision-making models presented, the counselor is able to successfully navigate the military mental health system, while still maintaining the professional standards of the counseling profession. In each model, the situation is resolved with considerable attention to the client’s best interest, while maintaining the expectations of the military clinic. Psychologists developed the two ethical models presented, and counselors may choose to utilize these approaches until more counselor-specific ethical processes are created. As counselors become more permanent fixtures in the VA mental health system and as TRICARE providers, opportunities to develop an ethical decision-making model will likely arise.

The recent inclusion of counselors as mental health professionals within the VA system and as TRICARE providers allows for new employment opportunities with the military population. However, these new opportunities are not without potential dilemmas. Counselors interested in working with service members need to be educated on the potential conflict between counselor professional ethical guidelines and military protocols. Future research in the counseling field may develop a counselor-specific ethical decision-making model. In the meantime, counselors may utilize or adapt the ethical decision-making models created by other mental health professionals, who have a longer history working with the military population.

American Counseling Association. (2005). ACA code of ethics . Retrieved from http://www.counseling.org/Resources/aca-code-of-ethics.pdf

Barnett, J. E., & Johnson, W. B. (2008). The ethics desk reference for psychologists. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.

Barstow, S., & Terrazas, A. (2012, February). DoD releases TRICARE rule on independent practice for counselors. Counseling Today, 54 (8), 10. Retrieved from

http://ct.counseling.org/2012/02/dod-releases-tricare-rule-on-independent-practice-for-counselors/

Garvey Wilson, A. L., Messer, S. C., & Hoge, C. W. (2009). U.S. military mental health care utilization and attrition prior to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology , 44 , 473 – 481. doi:10.1007/s00127-008-0461-7

Hall, L. (2011). The importance of understanding military culture. Social Work in Health Care , 50 , 4 – 18. doi:10.1080/00981389.2010.513914

Hoge, C. W., Auchterlonie, J. L., & Milliken, C. S. (2006). Mental health problems, use of mental health services, and attrition from military service after returning from deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan. The Journal of the American Medical Association , 295 (9), 1023 – 1032. doi:10.1001/jama.295.9.1023

Hoge, C. W., Castro, C. A., Messer, S. C., McGurk, D., Cotting, D. I., & Koffman, R. L. (2004). Combat duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, mental health problems, and barriers to care. The New England Journal of Medicine , 351 (1), 13 – 22. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa040603

Holder, K. A. (2007). Comparison of ACS and ASEC data on veteran status and period of military service: 2007 . U.S. Census Bureau: Housing and Household Economics Statistics Division. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/hhes/veterans/files/comparison_report.pdf

Johnson, W. B. (2008). Top ethical challenges for military clinical psychologists. Military Psychology, 20 , 49 – 62. doi:10.1080/08995600701753185

Johnson, W. B., Grasso, I., & Maslowski, K. (2010). Conflicts between ethics and law for military mental health providers. Military Medicine , 175 , 548 – 553.

Johnson, W., & Wilson, K. (1993). The military internship: A retrospective analysis. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice , 24 (3), 312 – 318. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.24.3.312

Kelly, M. M., Vogt, D. S., Scheiderer, E. M., Ouimette, P., Daley, J., & Wolfe, J. (2008). Effects of military trauma exposure on women veterans’ use and perceptions of Veterans Health Administration care. Journal of General Internal Medicine , 23 , 741 – 747. doi:10.1007/s11606-008-0589-x

Kennedy, C. H., & Johnson, W. B. (2009). Mixed agency in military psychology: Applying the American Psychological Association ethics code. Psychological Services , 6 (1), 22 – 31. doi:10.1037/a0014602

Kim, P. Y., Britt, T. W., Klocko, R. P., Riviere, L. A., & Adler, A. B. (2011). Stigma, negative attitudes about treatment, and utilization of mental health care among soldiers. Military Psychology , 23 , 65 – 81. doi:10.1080/08995605.2011.534415

Martin, J., Ghahramanlou-Holloway, M., Lou, K., & Tucciarone, P. (2009). A comparative review of U.S. military and civilian suicide behavior: Implications for OEF/OIF suicide prevention efforts. Journal of Mental Health Counseling , 31 (2), 101 – 118.

McCauley, M., Hacker Hughes, J., & Liebling-Kalifani, H. (2008). Ethical considerations for military clinical psychologists: A review of selected literature. Military Psychology , 20 , 7 – 20. doi:10.1080/08995600701753128

O’Gorman, K. (2012, August 16). Army reports record suicides in July [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://iava.org/blog/army-reports-record-high-suicides-july

Reger, M. A., Etherage, J. R., Reger, G. M., & Gahm, G. A. (2008). Civilian psychologists in an army culture: The ethical challenge of cultural competence. Military Psychology , 20 , 21 – 35. doi:10.1080/08995600701753144

Snell, F., & Tusaie, K. R. (2008). Veterans reported reasons for seeking mental health treatment. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing , 22 (5), 313 – 314. doi:10.1016/j.apnu.2008.06.003

Stone, A. M. (2008). Dual agency for VA clinicians: Defining an evolving ethical question. Military Psychology , 20 , 37 – 48. doi:10.1080/08995600701753177

Strom, T. Q., Gavian, M. E., Possis, E., Loughlin, J., Bui, T., Linardatos, E.,…Siegel, W. (2012). Cultural and ethical considerations when working with military personnel and veterans: A primer for VA training programs. Training and Education in Professional Psychology , 6 (2), 67 – 75. doi:10.1037/a0028275

U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. (2011). B21002: Period of military service for civilian veterans 18 years and over (2011 American Community Survey 1-year estimates). Retrieved from http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_11_1YR_B21002&prodType=table

U.S. Department of Defense. (n.d.). Enhanced post-deployment health assessment (PDHA) process (DD Form 2796). Retrieved from http://www.pdhealth.mil/dcs/dd_form_2796.asp

U.S. Department of Defense. (2012). Army releases July suicide data, No. 683-12 . Retrieved from http://www.defense.gov/releases/release.aspx?releaseid=15517

U.S. Department of Defense. (2013). DOD, VA and HHS partner to expand access to mental health services for veterans, service members, and families, No. 353-13 . Retrieved from http://www.defense.gov/releases/release.aspx?releaseid=16024

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. (n.d.). PTSD: National center for PTSD. Retrieved from http://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/index.asp

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (2012, April). VA adding family therapists and mental health counselors to workforce. Retrieved from http://www.va.gov/opa/pressrel/pressrelease.cfm?id=2303

Elizabeth A. Prosek, NCC, is an Assistant Professor at the University of North Texas. Jessica M. Holm is a doctoral student at the University of North Texas. Correspondence can be addressed to Elizabeth A. Prosek, University of North Texas, 1155 Union Circle #310829, Denton, TX 76203-5017, [email protected] .

Recent Publications

• Bridging the Gap: From Awareness to Action Introduction to the Special Issue March 18, 2024
• “A Learning Curve”: Counselors’ Experiences Working With Sex Trafficking January 17, 2024
• Ableist Microaggressions, Disability Characteristics, and Nondominant Identities January 17, 2024
• Using the Cultural Formulation Interview With Afro Latinx Immigrants in Counseling: A Practical Application January 17, 2024

• Skip to Content
• Skip to Main Navigation
• Skip to Search

Indiana University Bloomington Indiana University Bloomington IU Bloomington

• “Ad”mission of guilt
• “Do I stop him?”
• Newspaper joins war against drugs
• Have I got a deal for you!
• Identifying what’s right
• Is “Enough!” too much?
• Issues of bench and bar
• Knowing when to say “when!”
• Stop! This is a warning…
• Strange bedfellows
• Gambling with being first
• Making the right ethical choice can mean winning by losing
• Playing into a hoaxster’s hands
• “They said it first”
• Is it news, ad or informercial?
• Letter to the editor
• Games publishers play
• An offer you can refuse
• An oily gift horse
• Public service . . . or “news-mercials”
• As life passes by
• Bringing death close
• A careless step, a rash of calls
• Distortion of reality?
• Of life and death
• Naked came the rider
• “A photo that had to be used”
• A picture of controversy
• Freedom of political expression
• Brother, can you spare some time?
• Columnist’s crusade OK with Seattle
• Kiss and tell
• The making of a govenor
• Past but not over
• Of publishers and politics
• To tell the truth
• Truth & Consequences
• “Truth boxes”
• When journalists become flacks
• A book for all journalists who believe
• The Billboard Bandit
• Food for thought
• Grand jury probe
• Judgement on journalists
• Lessons from an ancient spirit
• Lying for the story . . .
• Newspaper nabs Atlanta’s Dahmer
• One way to a good end
• Over the fence
• “Psst! Pass it on!”
• Rules aren’t neat on Crack Street
• “Someone had to be her advocate”
• Trial by Fire
• Trial by proximity
• Using deceit to get the truth
• When advocacy is okay
• Witness to an execution
• Are we our brother’s keeper? . . . You bet we are!
• Betraying a trust
• Broken promise
• “But I thought you were . . . ”
• “Can I take it back?”
• Competitive disadvantage
• Getting it on tape
• The great quote question
• How to handle suicide threats
• Let’s make a deal!
• A phone-y issue?
• The source wanted out
• The story that died in a lie
• Thou shalt not break thy promise
• Thou shalt not concoct thy quote
• Thou shalt not trick thy source
• Too good to be true
• Vulnerable sources and journalistic responsibility
• The way things used to be . . .
• When a story just isn’t worth it
• When a story source threatens suicide
• When public should remain private
• The ethics of “outing”
• “For personal reasons”
• Intruding on grief
• Intruding on private pain
• Privacy case settled against TV station
• Seeing both sides
• Two views on “outing”
• Unwanted spotlight
• Whose right is it anyway?
• Other views on the Christine Busalacchi case
• The death of a soldier
• Firing at Round Rock
• A kinder, gentler news media
• Operation: Buy yourself a parade
• Rallying ’round the flag
• “Salute to military” ads canceled
• Tell the truth, stay alive
• The windbags of war
• Absent with no malice
• Anonymity for rape victims . . .
• An exception to the rule
• The boy with a broken heart
• Civilly suitable
• Creating a victim
• “Everyone already knew”
• An exceptional case
• Innocent victims
• Minor infraction
• Names make news
• Naming a victim
• Naming “johns”
• Profile of controversy
• What the media all missed
• Punishing plagiarizers
• Sounding an alarm on AIDS
• Suffer the children
• Anchor’s away
• The day the earth stood still
• Doing your own ethics audit
• Good guys, bad guys and TV news
• Is it just me, or . . . ?
• The Post’s exam answer story
• TV station “teases” suicide
• Yanking Doonesbury
• The year in review
• Colorado media’s option play
• Deadly lesson
• Deciding which critically ill person gets coverage
• When journalists play God . . .
• A delicate balance
• The Fallen Servant
• Handle with care
• It’s the principle, really
• Killing news
• Maybe what seems so right is wrong
• On the line
• Protest and apology after Daily Beacon story
• Red flag for badgering
• Sharing the community’s grief
• The “super-crip” stereotype
• “And then he said *&%*!!!”
• When big is not better
• When the KKK comes calling
• Not the straight story
• Agreeing to disagree
• All in the family
• Family feud
• Author! Author!
• The Bee that roared
• Brewing controversy
• Building barriers
• Other views from librarians
• The ethics of information selling
• Close to home
• Family ties
• How now, sacred cow?
• The ties that bind
• “Like any other story”
• When your newspaper is the news
• Not friendly fire
• Overdraft on credibility?
• The problem is the writing
• Written rules can be hazardous
• Project censored, sins of omission and the hardest “W” of all – “why”
• Risking the newsroom’s image
• The Media School

Ethics Case Studies

• Browse Ethics Case Studies

Military issues

The death of a soldier: Hometown decision for hometown hero

Firing at Round Rock: Editor says “unpatriotic” story led to dismissal  

A kinder, gentler news media?: Post-war coverage shows sensitivity to families

Operation: Buy yourself a parade: New York papers pitch in for hoopla celebrating hide-and-seek war

Rallying ’round the flag: The press as U.S. propagandists

“Salute to military” ads canceled

Tell the truth, stay alive: In covering a civil war, honesty is the only policy

The windbags of war: Television’s gung-ho coverage of the Persian Gulf situation

Ethics Case Studies resources and social media channels

Case Studies

On or about October 6th or 7th, 1941, occupied Belarus, a Wehrmacht Infantry Battalion Commander gave his three company commanders a single illegal order: “kill all the Jews in your areas of operation.” First company commander complied immediately. Second company commander considered it, and then he rejected the order. The third company commander directed the company’s first sergeant to go kill the Jews while he went back to his office. A single illegal order—three different responses. That’s what makes this such a unique case study.

[PIANO PLAYS]

[MGySgt Amber Starr Hecht]:

It’s very important in the military to constantly be groomed in the laws of armed conflict, and when they’re put in a position of authority, leaders make an impact. Their decisions have consequences and also have second and third order effects. It’s a culture—it’s a way of thinking. It’s keeping us morally and ethically sound.

[MSgt Benjamin S. Causey]:

A lot of training is bullet point. Everyone knows the regulations and the laws specifically, word for word. But, topics regarding leadership and ethics are never very clear cut. They’re very seldom in reality black and white. There’s also education that gives them the opportunity for students to look at a scenario that may on the surface seem black and white. It might seem cut and dry, but once you start digging in, you find that the situation is a little less black and white and also the responses to the situation are kind of complex.

[COL (Ret.) Jody M. Prescott]:

It is very useful to be using a case study rooted in the Holocaust because we have a historical record well researched, well documented, that allows us to be fairly certain about the historical accuracy and it makes it easier to take a small piece of that—to take a fractal—of that genocidal experience, and to look at it under the microscope and to move the students to talk about these issues of ethics and leadership amongst themselves.

The museum provides a website that has a very specific case study document that gives you not only a historical case that even your students can read from, but it also gives the instructor pointers on questions they can ask with the kind of target answers that the instructor might expect to receive. The material provides lots of context about WWII, about the Holocaust, about the German military. One of the great things about the case study is how scalable it is. You can make this a week long lesson or it can be done in an afternoon.

What I tell instructors is, you want to really engage your students. Get them open, get them talking, but don’t give them the answers. You want them to do the research--you want them to read. The way they learn is through the struggle sometimes and you want to put them in the process of learning.

Because, that’s where you’re going to start getting the students thinking about what kinds of things could they do as leaders to be able to make a difference. With a real, historically accurate case study, it’s possible to identify—if not with the officers—with the situations that they faced and how they resolved them.

[PIANO MUSIC FADES OUT]

The Museum has developed a variety of educational approaches for examining a historical case study in which three company commanders responded differently to the same illegal order to shoot the Jewish population in their areas of operations.

The two approaches below,  A Wehrmacht Battalion and its Orders, Fall 1941  and  Ordinary Soldiers: A Study in Ethics, Law, and Leadership , examine the case study through the lenses of leadership and decision making on the Eastern Front and related issues for the military today.

The case study provides an important empirical example of how officers making command decisions during armed conflict will define their duty in different ways. Their decisions reflect a variety of different factors including command climate, situational factors, individual experiences, leadership style, moral and ethical compasses, and social and cultural values.

A Wehrmacht Battalion and its Orders, Fall 1941

Contains:  Case study, historical resources, classroom handouts

Topics covered:  Leadership, ethical decision-making, professional military values, pressures and motivations affecting command decision-making

This approach is designed to focus on leadership philosophy and how that philosophy is put into action. The historical case study reveals the dynamic relationship between command climate, obedience to orders, discipline, and the protection of civilians in armed conflict. It is well-suited for discussions of leadership and ethical decision-making. This model has been used on-site at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum with officers-in-training, non-commissioned officers, and other active duty officers.

A Wehrmacht Battalion  PDF

A Wehrmacht Battalion  Powerpoint

Powerpoint Guide

Ordinary Soldiers: A Study in Ethics, Law, and Leadership

Contains:  Case study, three lesson options, primary sources (including Wehrmacht orders and trial documents)

Topics covered:  Command responsibility, LOAC, professional military values, pressures and motivations affecting command decision-making

Ordinary Soldiers  is a more technical examination of the case study that pairs well with instruction on the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It has three teaching options.

Option A enables participants to practice the Army Regulation 15–6 format for conducting investigations. This approach allows participants to put themselves in the position of investigating officers tasked not just with explaining what happened but also with why it happened and how it might be prevented in the future.

The study questions in Option B consider Rules of Engagement and the Law of Armed Conflict, and they lend themselves to small-group work. These questions are designed to allow participants to approach ethical and legal aspects of the case study from specific perspectives, thereby providing a platform for discussions on leadership.

Option C’s peer-to-peer format provides the opportunity for participants to engage in high levels of simultaneous communication simulating the challenges of leadership and conflict in a cyber environment.

Ordinary Soldiers  is a United States Holocaust Memorial Museum and Center for Holocaust Studies at West Point joint publication.

Ordinary Soldiers  PDF

Ordinary Soldiers  E-book

Ordinary Soldiers  Kindle edition

• Skip to Content
• Bulletin Home

2023-24 General Bulletin

• University Leadership
• Accreditation
• Centers + Institutes
• Departments
• Bachelor's Degree Requirements
• Unified General Education Requirements
• Majors and Minors
• Explore Program
• Academic Advising
• Collaborative Programs
• Programs Toward Graduate or Professional Degrees
• Experiential Learning
• Academic Policies and Procedures
• Academic Integrity
• Academic Standing Regulations
• Scholarship Retention
• Honors and Awards
• Non-​Degree Students
• AP/​IB Credit Equivalencies
• Academic Policies + Procedures
• Programs of Study
• Academic Requirements
• Admission + Financial Aid
• Postdoctoral Affairs
• University Registrar
• Administration
• Biomedical Engineering, BSE
• Biomedical Engineering, Minor
• Biomedical Engineering, MS
• Biomedical Engineering, MS (Online)
• Biomedical Engineering, PhD
• Biomolecular Engineering, Minor
• Chemical Engineering, BSE
• Chemical Engineering, Minor
• Chemical Engineering, MS
• Chemical Engineering, PhD
• Electrochemical Engineering, Minor
• Civil Engineering, BSE
• Civil Engineering, Minor
• Civil Engineering, MS
• Civil Engineering, PhD
• Environmental Engineering, Minor
• Artificial Intelligence, Minor
• Computer Science, BA
• Computer Science, BS
• Computer Science, Minor
• Computer Science, MS
• Computer Science, MS (Online)
• Computer Science, PhD
• Data Science and Analytics, BS
• Computer Engineering, BSE
• Computer Engineering, Minor
• Computer Engineering, MS
• Computer Engineering, PhD
• Computer Gaming, Minor
• Electrical Engineering, BSE
• Electrical Engineering, Minor
• Electrical Engineering, MS
• Electrical Engineering, PhD
• Electronics, Minor
• Systems and Control Engineering, BSE
• Systems and Control Engineering, Minor
• Systems and Control Engineering, MS
• Systems and Control Engineering, MS (Online)
• Systems and Control Engineering, PhD
• Macromolecular Science, MS
• Macromolecular Science, PhD
• Polymer Science and Engineering, BSE
• Polymer Science and Engineering, Minor
• Applied Data Science, Graduate Certificate
• Applied Data Science, Minor
• Materials Science and Engineering, BSE
• Materials Science and Engineering, Minor
• Materials Science and Engineering, MS
• Materials Science and Engineering, PhD
• Aerospace Engineering, BSE
• Aerospace Engineering, MS
• Aerospace Engineering, PhD
• Mechanical Design and Manufacturing, Minor
• Mechanical Engineering, BSE
• Mechanical Engineering, MS
• Mechanical Engineering, MS (Online)
• Mechanical Engineering, PhD
• Division of Engineering Leadership and Professional Practice
• Anthropology, BA
• Anthropology, MA
• Anthropology, Minor
• Anthropology, PhD
• Art Education, BS
• Art Education, MA
• Art History and Museum Studies, MA
• Art History, BA
• Art History, MA
• Art History, Minor
• Art History, PhD
• Art Studio, Minor
• Photography, Minor
• Pre-​Architecture, BA
• Pre-​Architecture, Minor
• Visual Design, Minor
• Astronomy, BA
• Astronomy, BS
• Astronomy, Minor
• Astronomy, PhD
• Biology, BA
• Biology, BS
• Biology, Minor
• Biology, MS
• Biology, PhD
• Neuroscience, BS
• Systems Biology, BS
• Chemical Biology, BA
• Chemistry, BA
• Chemistry, BS
• Chemistry, Minor
• Chemistry, MS
• Chemistry, PhD
• Ancient Near Eastern and Egyptian Studies, BA
• Ancient Near Eastern and Egyptian Studies, Minor
• Classical Studies, MA
• Classics, BA
• Classics, Minor
• Cognitive Linguistics, MA
• Cognitive Science, BA
• Cognitive Science, Minor
• Contemporary Dance, MA
• Contemporary Dance, MFA
• Dance, Minor
• Environmental Geology, BA
• Geological Sciences, BA
• Geological Sciences, BS
• Geological Sciences, Minor
• Geological Sciences, MS
• Geological Sciences, PhD
• Creative Writing, Minor
• English, BA
• English, MA
• English, Minor
• English, PhD
• Film, Minor
• History, BA
• History, MA
• History, Minor
• History, PhD
• Applied Mathematics, BS
• Applied Mathematics, MS
• Applied Mathematics, PhD
• Mathematics and Physics, BS
• Mathematics, BA
• Mathematics, BS
• Mathematics, Minor
• Mathematics, MS
• Mathematics, PhD
• Statistics, BA
• Statistics, BS
• Statistics, Minor
• Statistics, MS
• Chinese, BA
• Chinese, Minor
• French, Minor
• German, Minor
• Italian, Minor
• Japanese Studies, BA
• Japanese, Minor
• Russian, Minor
• Spanish, BA
• Spanish, Minor
• Historical Performance Practice, DMA
• Historical Performance Practice, MA
• Music Education, BS
• Music Education, MA
• Music Education, PhD
• Music History, MA
• Music, Minor
• Musicology, PhD
• Ethics, Minor
• Military Ethics, MA
• Philosophy, BA
• Philosophy, Minor
• Physics, BA
• Physics, BS
• Physics, Minor
• Physics, MS
• Physics, PhD
• International Studies, BA
• Political Science, BA
• Political Science, MA
• Political Science, Minor
• Political Science, PhD
• Public Policy, Minor
• Communication for Health Professionals, Minor
• Communication Sciences, BA
• Communication Sciences, MA
• Communication Sciences, Minor
• Communication Sciences, PhD
• Early Intervention Developmental Specialist, Graduate Certificate
• Psychology, BA
• Psychology, MA
• Psychology, Minor
• Psychology, PhD
• Africana Studies, Minor
• Religious Studies, BA
• Religious Studies, MA
• Religious Studies, Minor
• Sociology, BA
• Sociology, MA
• Sociology, Minor
• Sociology, PhD
• Theater Arts, BA
• Theater Arts, MA
• Theater Arts, MFA
• Theater Arts, Minor
• Other Student Categories
• Leadership Excel and Achievement Program (LEAP), Graduate Certificate
• Nursing Post-​Graduate Certification
• Nursing Practice, DNP
• Nursing, BSN
• Nursing, MN
• Acute Care Pediatric Nurse Practitioner, MSN
• Adult-​Gerontology Acute Care Nurse Practitioner, MSN
• Adult-​Gerontology Primary Care Nurse Practitioner, MSN
• Family Nurse Practitioner, MSN
• Family Psychiatric Mental Health Nurse Practitioner, MSN
• Leadership, MSN
• Neonatal Nurse Practitioner, MSN
• Nurse Midwifery, MSN
• Pediatric Primary Care Nurse Practitioner, MSN
• Women's Health Nurse Practitioner, MSN
• Nursing, PhD
• Nonprofit Management, Graduate Certificate
• Nonprofit Organizations, MNO
• Social Welfare, PhD
• Social Work, Minor
• Social Work, MSW
• Social Work, MSW (Intensive Weekend)
• Social Work, MSW (Online)
• Trauma-​Informed Practice, Graduate Certificate
• Advanced Education in General Dentistry, Professional Certification
• Craniofacial, Surgical, and Special Care Orthodontics, Professional Certification
• Dental Medicine, DMD
• Dental Public Health, Professional Certification
• Endodontics, MSD
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, MSD
• Oral Medicine, MSD
• Orthodontics, MSD
• Pediatric Dentistry, MSD
• Periodontics, MSD
• Compliance and Risk Management, Graduate Certificate
• Compliance and Risk Management, MCRM
• Financial Integrity, MA
• Law, JD (Online)
• Master of Laws, LLM
• Master of Laws, LLM (Online)
• Master of Laws, ML
• Patent Practice, MA
• Affiliated Hospitals
• Applied Anatomy, MS
• Anesthesia, MSA
• Biochemistry, BA
• Biochemistry, BS
• Biochemistry, Minor
• Biochemistry, MS
• Biochemistry, PhD
• Experimental Biotechnology, Graduate Certificate
• Bioethics and Medical Humanities, MA
• Bioethics and Medical Humanities, Minor
• Bioethics, PhD
• Biomedical Sciences Training Program
• Genetic Counseling, MS
• Genetics, PhD
• Medical Scientist Training Program (MSTP), PhD/​Medicine, MD
• Medicine (College Program), MD
• Medicine (University Program), MD
• Cell Biology, PhD
• Molecular Biology and Microbiology, PhD
• Molecular Virology, PhD
• Molecular Medicine, PhD
• Neurosciences, PhD
• Environmental Nutrition, Food Systems Sustainability, and Health, Minor
• Maternal and Child Nutrition, Graduate Certificate
• Nutrition and Lifestyle Medicine, Minor
• Nutrition for Health Care Professionals, Graduate Certificate
• Nutrition, BA
• Nutrition, BS
• Nutrition, Minor
• Nutrition, MS
• Nutrition, PhD
• Nutritional Biochemistry and Metabolism, BA
• Nutritional Biochemistry and Metabolism, BS
• Public Health Nutrition, MS
• Sports Nutrition, Minor
• Systems Biology and Bioinformatics, MS
• Systems Biology and Bioinformatics, PhD
• Pathology, MS
• Pathology, PhD
• Pharmacology, MS
• Pharmacology, PhD
• Translational Pharmaceutical Science, MS
• Physician Assistant Studies, MSPAS
• Aerospace Physiology, Graduate Certificate
• Aerospace Physiology, Graduate Certificate (Online)
• Medical Physiology, MS
• Medical Physiology, MS (Online)
• Physiology and Biophysics, PhD
• Physiology, MS
• Biomedical and Health Informatics, MS
• Biomedical and Health Informatics, PhD
• Clinical Research, MS
• Clinical Translational Science, PhD
• Epidemiology and Biostatistics, MS
• Epidemiology and Biostatistics, PhD
• Health Informatics, Graduate Certificate
• Public Health, Graduate Certificate
• Public Health, Minor
• Public Health, MPH
• Graduate Education
• Accountancy, MAcc
• Accounting, BS
• Accounting, Minor
• Banking and Finance, Minor
• Finance, BSM
• Finance, MFin
• Finance, MFin (China)
• FinTech, Minor
• FinTech, MSFT
• Business Information Technology, BSM
• Management, PhD
• Marketing, BSM
• Marketing, Minor
• Economics, BA
• Economics, Minor
• Supply Chain Management, MSCM
• Leadership, Minor
• Organizational Behavior, PhD
• Positive Organization Development and Change, MSPOD
• Academic English (AIAE)
• Academic Inquiry Seminar (AIQS)
• Accounting (ACCT)
• Africana Studies (AFST)
• Akkadian (AKKD)
• Anatomy (ANAT)
• Ancient Near East/​Egyptian Studies (ANEE)
• Anesthesiology (ANES)
• Anthropology (ANTH)
• Applied Data Science (DSCI)
• Applied Music (MUAP)
• Arabic (ARAB)
• Art History (ARTH)
• Art Studio (ARTS)
• Asian Studies (ASIA)
• Astronomy (ASTR)
• Banking &​ Finance (BAFI)
• Biochemistry (BIOC)
• Bioethics (BETH)
• Biology (BIOL)
• Biomedical Engineering (EBME)
• Biomedical Sciences Training Program (BSTP)
• Bioscience Entrepreneurship (BIOS)
• Business Analytics &​ Intelligence (BUAI)
• Business Law (BLAW)
• Business Technology (BTEC)
• Cancer Center (CNCR)
• Cell Biology (CLBY)
• Chemical Engineering (ECHE)
• Chemistry (CHEM)
• Childhood Studies (CHST)
• Chinese (CHIN)
• Civil Engineering (ECIV)
• Classics (CLSC)
• Clinical Medicine -​ CCLCM (CMED)
• Clinical Research Scholars Program (CRSP)
• Cognitive Science (COGS)
• Communication Sciences (COSI)
• Computer and Data Sciences (CSDS)
• Cooperative Education (COOP)
• Dance (DANC)
• Dental Public Health (DPHC)
• Dentistry (DENT)
• Design &​ Innovation (DESN)
• Disease &​ Restoration of Health (DSRE)
• Disease Processes (DSPR)
• Doctor of Business Administration (DBAP)
• Doctor of Nursing (NUND)
• Earth, Environmental, and Planetary Sciences (EEPS)
• Economics (ECON)
• Education (EDUC)
• Education Abroad (EDAB)
• Egyptian Hieroglyphs (HIER)
• Electrical, Computer, and Systems Engineering (ECSE)
• Endodontics (DNDO)
• Engineering Science (ENGR)
• English (ENGL)
• Entrepreneurship (ENTP)
• Environmental Studies (ESTD)
• Ethnic Studies (ETHS)
• Examination Master/​Ph.D. (EXAM)
• Executive Doctor of Management (EDMP)
• Executive MBA (EMBA)
• Expanded Function Dental Auxiliary (EFDA)
• Finance (FNCE)
• FinTech (FTEC)
• French (FRCH)
• Genetics (GENE)
• German (GRMN)
• Gerontological Studies (GERO)
• Graduate Summer Research (RSCH)
• Greek (GREK)
• Health &​ Well-​Being (HEWB)
• Health Disease and Processes (HWDP)
• Health Systems Management (HSMC)
• Hebrew (HBRW)
• History &​ Philosophy of Science (HPSC)
• History (HSTY)
• Humanities (HUMN)
• Information Systems (MIDS)
• Inquiry (INQU)
• Institute for Integration of Management and Engineering (IIME)
• Integrated Biological Sciences (IBIS)
• Integrated BioMedical Studies (IBMS)
• Interdisciplinary Health Sciences (IHSC)
• International Exchange Program (EXCH)
• International Health (INTH)
• International Studies (INTL)
• Italian (ITAL)
• Japanese (JAPN)
• Judaic Studies (JDST)
• Latin (LATN)
• Law -​ Financial Integrity (LFIN)
• Law School Study Abroad (LSAB)
• Leadership (LDRS)
• Leadership Excel and Achievement Program (LEAP)
• Linguistics (LING)
• Macromolecular and Polymer Science (EMAC)
• Maintenance of Health (MAHE)
• Management (MGMT)
• Management Policy (PLCY)
• Marketing (MKMR)
• Master of Nursing (NUMN)
• Materials Science &​ Engineerng (EMSE)
• Mathematics (MATH)
• MBA Core (MBAC)
• MBA Part Time Cohort (MBAP)
• Mechanical &​ Aerospace Engineering (EMAE)
• Medical Scientist Training Program (MSTP)
• Military Science (MLSC)
• Molecular Biology &​ Microbiology (MBIO)
• Molecular Medicine (MMED)
• Molecular Virology Training Program (MVIR)
• Music History (MUHI)
• Music Literature (MULI)
• Music Theory (MUTH)
• Music, Audio Recording (MUAR)
• Music, Composition (MUCP)
• Music, Dalcroze/​Eurhythmics (MUDE)
• Music, Education (MUED)
• Music, Ensembles (MUEN)
• Music, General/​Misc (MUGN)
• Music, Pedagogy (MUPD)
• Music, Repertoire (MURP)
• Music, Secondary Performance (MUSP)
• Neurosciences (NEUR)
• Nurse Practitioner (NUNP)
• Nursing (NURS)
• Nursing Anesthesiology (NUAN)
• Nursing Education (NUED)
• Nutrition (NTRN)
• Operations Management (OPMT)
• Operations Research (OPRE)
• Oral &​ Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS)
• Oral Medicine (DORL)
• Organizational Behavior (ORBH)
• Origins (ORIG)
• Orthodontics (DRTH)
• Pathology (PATH)
• Patient Based Clinical Comprehensive Care (COMP)
• Pediatric Dentistry (DPED)
• Periodontics (DPER)
• Pharmacology (PHRM)
• Philosophy (PHIL)
• Physical Education (PHED)
• Physician Assistant Studies (PAST)
• Physics (PHYS)
• Physiology &​ Biophysics (PHOL)
• Political Science (POSC)
• Population &​ Quantitative Health Sciences (PQHS)
• Portuguese (PORT)
• Positive Organizational Development (MPOD)
• Practice Oriented Masters Program (EPOM)
• Practicum (PRAC)
• Psychology (PSCL)
• Public Health (MPHP)
• Regenerative Medicine Entrepreneurship (RGME)
• Religious Studies (RLGN)
• Restoration &​ Maintenance of Health (REMA)
• Restoration of Health (REHE)
• Russian (RUSN)

The US is expected to block aid to an Israeli military unit. What is Leahy law that it would cite?

The Associated Press

April 22, 2024, 9:59 AM

• Share This:
• share on facebook
• share on threads
• share on linkedin
• share on email

WASHINGTON (AP) — Israel expects its top ally, the United States, to announce as soon as Monday that it’s blocking military aid to an Israeli army unit over gross human rights abuses in the Israeli-occupied West Bank before the war in Gaza began six months ago.

The move would mark the first time in the decades-long partnership between the two countries that a U.S. administration has invoked a landmark 27-year-old congressional act known as the Leahy law against an Israeli military unit.

It comes as the U.S.-Israeli relationship is under growing strain over civilian deaths and suffering in Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza.

Here’s a look at the Leahy law and how it could be invoked:

WHAT IS THE LEAHY LAW?

Former Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy championed legislation that became the Leahy law in the 1990s, saying the U.S. needed a tool to block American military aid and training to foreign security units guilty of extrajudicial killings, rapes, torture and other flagrant human rights abuses.

One of the first targets of the 1997 law was typical of the kind of renegade units that Congress had in mind: a Colombian army unit accused of knowingly killing thousands of civilians in part to get bonuses that were then being offered for killing militants.

Other U.S. laws are supposed to deal with other circumstances in which abuses would obligate blocking military support. Those include a February 2023 order by President Joe Biden dictating that “no arms transfer will be authorized” when the U.S. finds that more likely than not a foreign power would use them to commit serious violations of the laws of war or human rights or other crimes, including “serious acts of violence against children.”

HOW DOES THE LEAHY LAW WORK?

The law requires an automatic cutoff of aid to a military unit if the State Department finds credible evidence that it has committed gross abuses. A second Leahy law says the same for Defense Department training of foreign militaries.

Rights groups long have accused U.S. administrations, including Biden’s, of shirking rigorous investigations of allegations of Israeli military killings and other abuses against Palestinians to avoid invoking such laws aimed at conditioning military aid to lawful behavior by foreign forces.

Israel says its security forces investigate abuses and its courts hold offenders accountable.

HOW OFTEN IS THE LEAHY LAW INVOKED?

Regularly when it comes to U.S. security assistance to countries in the former Soviet Union and in Central and South America and Africa. Not often when it comes to strategically vital U.S. allies.

In 2022, for instance, the U.S. found sufficient evidence of abuses to trigger the Leahy law for police and other forces in Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan, Mexico and the Caribbean nation of Saint Lucia.

The administration also has the option of notifying Congress of Leahy law incidents in classified settings to avoid embarrassing key partners.

Administration veterans vouch that no U.S. government has previously invoked it against Israel, says Sarah Elaine Harrison, a former Defense Department attorney who worked on Leahy law issues and now is a senior analyst with the International Crisis Group.

WHAT CAN ISRAEL DO ABOUT THE CUTOFF?

Harrison points to a 2021 treaty in which Israel stipulated it wouldn’t share U.S. military aid with any unit that the U.S. had deemed credibly guilty of gross human rights abuses.

U.S. law points to one way out for an offender: A secretary of state can waive the Leahy law if he or she determines the government involved is taking effective steps to bring the offenders in the targeted unit to justice.

The U.S. still sends billions of dollars of funding and arms to Israel, including a new $26 billion package to support Israel’s defense and and provide relief for the growing humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza. The Senate is expected to pass that this week and Biden says he will sign.

Copyright © 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, written or redistributed.

Related News

Hamas releases video showing well-known Israeli-American hostage

Russia vetoes a UN resolution calling for the prevention of a dangerous nuclear arms race in space

Another ex-State Department official alleges Israeli military gets ‘special treatment’ on abuses

Recommended.

Jury sides with Fairfax Co. school system in lawsuit involving claims of middle school sex assault

Business empire of prominent DC-area family moving headquarters to Rosslyn high-rise

Will the FAFSA fiasco force current college students to drop out?

Related categories:.

The US is expected to block aid to an Israeli military unit. What is Leahy law that it would cite?

Israel expects its top ally, the United States, to announce that it’s blocking military aid to an Israeli army unit over gross human rights abuses in the Israeli-occupied West Bank before the war in Gaza began six months ago

WASHINGTON -- Israel expects its top ally, the United States, to announce as soon as Monday that it's blocking military aid to an Israeli army unit over gross human rights abuses in the Israeli-occupied West Bank before the war in Gaza began six months ago.

The move would mark the first time in the decades-long partnership between the two countries that a U.S. administration has invoked a landmark 27-year-old congressional act known as the Leahy law against an Israeli military unit.

It comes as the U.S.-Israeli relationship is under growing strain over civilian deaths and suffering in Israel's war against Hamas in Gaza.

Here's a look at the Leahy law and how it could be invoked:

Former Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy championed legislation that became the Leahy law in the 1990s, saying the U.S. needed a tool to block American military aid and training to foreign security units guilty of extrajudicial killings, rapes, torture and other flagrant human rights abuses.

One of the first targets of the 1997 law was typical of the kind of renegade units that Congress had in mind: a Colombian army unit accused of knowingly killing thousands of civilians in part to get bonuses that were then being offered for killing militants.

Other U.S. laws are supposed to deal with other circumstances in which abuses would obligate blocking military support. Those include a February 2023 order by President Joe Biden dictating that “no arms transfer will be authorized” when the U.S. finds that more likely than not a foreign power would use them to commit serious violations of the laws of war or human rights or other crimes, including “serious acts of violence against children.”

The law requires an automatic cutoff of aid to a military unit if the State Department finds credible evidence that it has committed gross abuses. A second Leahy law says the same for Defense Department training of foreign militaries.

Rights groups long have accused U.S. administrations, including Biden's, of shirking rigorous investigations of allegations of Israeli military killings and other abuses against Palestinians to avoid invoking such laws aimed at conditioning military aid to lawful behavior by foreign forces.

Israel says its security forces investigate abuses and its courts hold offenders accountable.

Regularly when it comes to U.S. security assistance to countries in the former Soviet Union and in Central and South America and Africa. Not often when it comes to strategically vital U.S. allies.

In 2022, for instance, the U.S. found sufficient evidence of abuses to trigger the Leahy law for police and other forces in Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan, Mexico and the Caribbean nation of Saint Lucia.

The administration also has the option of notifying Congress of Leahy law incidents in classified settings to avoid embarrassing key partners.

Administration veterans vouch that no U.S. government has previously invoked it against Israel, says Sarah Elaine Harrison, a former Defense Department attorney who worked on Leahy law issues and now is a senior analyst with the International Crisis Group.

Harrison points to a 2021 treaty in which Israel stipulated it wouldn't share U.S. military aid with any unit that the U.S. had deemed credibly guilty of gross human rights abuses.

U.S. law points to one way out for an offender: A secretary of state can waive the Leahy law if he or she determines the government involved is taking effective steps to bring the offenders in the targeted unit to justice.

The U.S. still sends billions of dollars of funding and arms to Israel, including a new $26 billion package to support Israel’s defense and and provide relief for the growing humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza. The Senate is expected to pass that this week and Biden says he will sign.

Top Stories

What witnesses said about Trump's handling of classified info while president

Airlines required to refund passengers for canceled, delayed flights

• Apr 24, 11:06 AM

Secret Service prepares for if Trump is jailed for contempt in hush money case

• Apr 23, 4:16 PM

Trump is unindicted co-conspirator in Michigan fake elector case, hearing reveals

• 3 hours ago

Plastic bags from Walmart US recycling tracked to facilities in Southeast Asia

• Apr 23, 9:48 PM

ABC News Live

24/7 coverage of breaking news and live events

Biden says the US is rushing weaponry to Ukraine as he signs a $95 billion war aid measure into law

WASHINGTON (AP) —  President Joe Biden  said Wednesday that he was immediately rushing  badly needed weaponry to Ukraine  as he signed into law  a $95 billion war aid measure  that also included assistance for Israel, Taiwan and other global hot spots.

The announcement marked an end to the long, painful battle with  Republicans in Congress  over urgently needed assistance for Ukraine, with Biden promising that U.S. weapons shipment would begin making the way into Ukraine “in the next few hours.”

“We rose to the moment, we came together, and we got it done,” Biden said a White House event to announce the bill signing. “Now we need to move fast, and we are.”

But significant damage has been done to the Biden administration’s effort to help Ukraine repel  Russia’s invasion  during the funding impasse that dates back to August, when the Democratic president made his first emergency spending request for Ukraine. Even with a burst of new weapons and ammunition, it’s unlikely Ukraine will immediately recover after months of setbacks.

Biden immediately approved sending Ukraine $1 billion in  military assistance , the first installment from about $61 billion allocated for Ukraine. The package includes air defense capabilities, artillery rounds, armored vehicles and other weapons to shore up Ukrainian forces who have seen morale sink as Russian President Vladimir Putin has racked up win after win.

Meanwhile, Ukraine for the first time has  begun using  long-range ballistic missiles  provided secretly by the United States , bombing a Russian military airfield in Crimea last week and Russian forces in another occupied area overnight, American officials confirmed Wednesday. The U.S. is providing more of the Army Tactical Missile System, known as ATACMS, in the new  military package , according to one official who was not authorized to comment and spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Still, longer term, it remains uncertain if Ukraine, after months of losses and massive damage to its infrastructure, can make enough progress to sustain American political support before burning through the latest influx of money.

White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan cautioned that even as new U.S. aid flows into Ukraine, it’s possible that Russia will continue to make tactical gains in the weeks ahead.

“The fact is that it’s going to take some time for us to dig out of the hole that was created by six months of delay,” he said.

Tucked into the measure is a provision that gives  TikTok’s Beijing-based parent company, ByteDance , nine months to sell it or face a nationwide prohibition in the United States. The administration and a bipartisan group of lawmakers have called the social media site a growing national security concern, which ByteDance denies.

The bill includes about $26 billion in aid for Israel and about $1 billion in humanitarian relief for Palestinians in Gaza as  the Israel-Hamas war  continues. Biden said Israel must ensure the humanitarian aid for Palestinians in bill reaches the Hamas-controlled territory “without delay.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., delayed the aid package for months as members of his party’s far right wing, including Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Thomas Massie of Kentucky, threatened to  move to oust him  if he allowed a vote to send more assistance to Ukraine. Those threats persist.

Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, has complained that European allies have not done enough for Ukraine. While the former president stopped short of endorsing the funding package, his tone has shifted in recent days, acknowledging that Ukraine’s survival is important to the United States.

Many European leaders have long been nervous that a second Trump term would mean decreased U.S. support for Ukraine and NATO. The European anxiety was heightened in February when Trump in a campaign speech warned  NATO allies  that he “would encourage” Russia to  “do whatever the hell they want”  to countries that don’t meet defense spending goals if he returns to the White House.

It was a key moment in the debate over Ukraine spending. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg quickly called out Trump for putting  “American and European soldiers at increased risk.”  But in reality, the White House maneuvering to win additional funding for Ukraine started months earlier.

Biden, the day after returning from  a trip to Tel Aviv  following Hamas militants’  Oct. 7 attack  on Israel, used a prime-time address to make his pitch for the funding.

At the time, the House was in chaos because the Republican majority had been  unable to select a speaker  to replace Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., who had been ousted weeks earlier at the urging of restive legislators on the right.

Far-right Republicans have adamantly opposed sending more money for Ukraine, with the war appearing to have no end in sight. Biden in August requested more than $20 billion to keep aid flowing into Ukraine, but the money was stripped out of  a must-pass spending bill .

By late October, Republicans finally settled on Johnson, a low-profile Louisiana Republican whose thinking on Ukraine was opaque, to serve as the next speaker. Biden during his congratulatory call with Johnson urged him to quickly pass Ukraine aid and began a monthslong, largely behind-the-scenes effort to bring the matter to a vote.

In private conversations with Johnson, Biden and White House officials leaned into the stakes for Europe if Ukraine were to fall to Russia. On explicit orders from Biden, White House officials also avoided directly attacking Johnson over the stalled aid.

Biden praised Johnson and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., saying in the end they “stepped up and did the right thing.”

“History will remember this moment,” he said.

At frustrating moments during the negotiations, Biden urged his aides to “just keep talking, keep working,” according to a senior administration official, who insisted on anonymity to discuss internal discussions.

So they did. In a daily meeting convened by White House chief of staff Jeff Zients, the president’s top aides would brainstorm possible ways to better make the case about Ukraine’s dire situation in the absence of aid.

The White House also sought to accommodate Johnson and his various asks. For instance, administration officials at the speaker’s request briefed Reps. Chip Roy, R-Texas, and Ralph Norman, R-S.C., two conservatives who were persistent antagonists of Johnson.

In public, the administration deployed a strategy of downgrading intelligence that demonstrated Russia’s efforts to tighten its ties with U.S. adversaries China, North Korea and Iran to fortify Moscow’s defense industrial complex and get around U.S. and European sanctions.

The $61 billion can help triage Ukrainian forces, but Kyiv will need much more for a fight that could last years, military experts say.

Realistic goals for the months ahead for Ukraine — and its allies — include avoiding the loss of major cities, slowing Russia’s momentum and getting to Kyiv additional weaponry that could help them go on the offensive in 2025, said Bradley Bowman, a defense strategy and policy analyst at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies in Washington.

“I think Ukrainian success is not guaranteed,” Bowman said, “but Russian success is if we stop supporting Ukraine.”

Biden lamented that the package did not include money to bolster U.S. border security. The White House had proposed including in the package provisions it said would have helped stem the tide of migrants and asylum seekers coming to the U.S. Republicans, however, rejected the proposal at the urging of Trump, who did not want to give Biden the win on an issue that’s been an albatross for the Democratic administration.

Associated Press writers Lolita C. Baldor, Haleluya Hadero, Mary Clare Jalonick and Darlene Superville contributed to this report.

Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Siblings, ages 4 and 8, killed after car crashes into child’s birthday party in Monroe Co.

TPD: Woman shot by officer while approaching children with knife dies from injuries

BODYCAM: Lima man arrested in Leipsic double shooting that killed Deshler woman

Woman charged with murder in fatal birthday party crash that killed 2 kids, injured 15 people

Missing mother of 10 found dead in car trunk, police say

Latest news.

Judge declines to dismiss lawsuits filed against rapper Travis Scott over deadly Astroworld concert

Bright Side: April 24, 2024

Sculpture valued at $8,000 vandalized with chalk in downtown Tecumseh

Metroparks Meetup: Calling all bird watchers

Police tangle with students in Texas and California as wave of campus protest against Gaza war grows

Netanyahu to fight any sanctions on Israeli army

I sraeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu has vowed to fight any sanctions on the country's military following reports that the US is planning to cut aid to one unit.

"I will fight it with all my strength," he said on Sunday.

Earlier, the Axios news site said the US would target Israel's Netzah Yehuda battalion over alleged human rights violations in the occupied West Bank.

The BBC understands any move would come under a US ban on aid to foreign units credibly implicated in violations.

When asked last week about reports that US military aid to the Israel Defense Forces' (IDF) units could be cut over allegations of human rights abuses in the occupied West Bank, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said: "I've made determinations; you can expect to see them in the days ahead".

Washington - Israel's main ally - has never suspended aid to an IDF unit before.

The Israeli military said Netzah Yehuda was operating in accordance with international law.

"Following publications about sanctions against the battalion, the IDF is not aware of the issue," the military is quoted as saying by Reuters news agency. "The IDF works and will continue to work to investigate any unusual event in a practical manner and according to law."

On Saturday, Axios cited three US sources with knowledge of the issue as saying that Mr Blinken was expected to announce measures against Netzah Yehuda within days.

It said the move would be over alleged abuses in the West Bank, including one incident in which a Palestinian-American man, 80-year-old Omar Assad, died after being bound and gagged by Israeli soldiers during a search in the West Bank in January 2022.

At the time the US called for a "thorough criminal investigation and full accountability" in the case.

The IDF later said it regretted Mr Assad's death and that the Netzah Yehuda commander would be "reprimanded"over it. It added that two soldiers would barred from serving in senior positions for two years, but would not be prosecuted. It said Mr Assad's death had been caused by a pre-existing medical condition.

Mr Assad's family, many of whom are based in the US, condemned the decision to close the case.

All the alleged violations took place before the 7 October Hamas attack on Israel from the Gaza Strip.

Any decision to bar an IDF unit from US military assistance would be made under the "Leahy Law", sponsored in 1997 by then-Senator Patrick Leahy. It prevents US funding or training being used for foreign military units credibly implicated in gross human rights violations.

Last year, a group of US officials known as the "Israel-Leahy vetting forum" looked into at least a dozen allegations made against Israeli units, including the Netzah Yehuda battalion, a former senior US official told the BBC.

"We believed that in most cases, these were un-remediated - in other words, the perpetrators had not been properly held to account," said Josh Paul, former director of the state department's Political-Military Affairs bureau, which oversees US arms transfers.

"When we tried to advance these recommendations to the secretary [of state] we were never able to get them through the political level," he added.

Mr Paul resigned from his position in November in protest at what he saw as a lack of accountability over weapons transfers to Israel. Asked whether the recommendations he mentioned had since reached Mr Blinken's desk, he cited the recent media reports suggesting they had.

Formed in 1999, Netzah Yehuda is a special men-only unit where ultra-Orthodox Jews serve.

Earlier this week, the state department imposed sanctions on Israeli far-right activist Ben Zion Gopstein. It said his organisation, Lehava, had "engaged in destabilising violence affecting the West Bank".

What’s EMTALA, the patient protection law at…

Share this:.

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on X (Opens in new window)

Daily e-Edition

Evening e-Edition

• Entertainment
• Restaurants, Food & Drink

Breaking News

Madeline soto: stephan sterns charged with first-degree murder, what’s emtala, the patient protection law at the center of supreme court abortion arguments.

File – The Supreme Court is seen on Friday, April 21, 2023, in Washington. The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments Wednesday in a case that could determine whether doctors can provide abortions to pregnant women with medical emergencies in states that enact abortion bans. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)

FILE – Abortion-rights groups march outside the Supreme Court, March 26, 2024, in Washington. The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments Wednesday in a case that could determine whether doctors can provide abortions to pregnant women with medical emergencies in states that enact abortion bans. (AP Photo/Amanda Andrade-Rhoades, File)

FILE – Anti-Abortion demonstrators protest outside of the Supreme Court during a rally, March 26, 2024, in Washington. The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments Wednesday in a case that could determine whether doctors can provide abortions to pregnant women with medical emergencies in states that enact abortion bans. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)

By AMANDA SEITZ (Associated Press)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court will hear arguments Wednesday in a case that could determine whether doctors can provide abortions to pregnant women with medical emergencies in states that enact abortion bans.

The Justice Department has sued Idaho over its abortion law, which allows a woman to get an abortion only when her life — not her health — is at risk. The state law has raised questions about when a doctor is able to provide the stabilizing treatment that federal law requires.

The federal law, called the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act , or EMTALA, requires doctors to stabilize or treat any patient who shows up at an emergency room.

Here’s a look at the history of EMTALA, what rights it provides patients and how a Supreme Court ruling might change that.

WHAT PROTECTIONS DOES EMTALA PROVIDE ME AT AN ER?

Simply put, EMTALA requires emergency rooms to offer a medical exam if you turn up at their facility. The law applies to nearly all emergency rooms — any that accept Medicare funding.

Those emergency rooms are required to stabilize patients if they do have a medical emergency before discharging or transferring them. And if the ER doesn’t have the resources or staff to properly treat that patient, staff members are required to arrange a medical transfer to another hospital, after they’ve confirmed the facility can accept the patient.

So, for example, if a pregnant woman shows up at an emergency room concerned that she is in labor but there is no OB/GYN on staff, hospital staff cannot simply direct the woman to go elsewhere.

WHY WAS THIS LAW CREATED?

Look to Chicago in the early 1980s.

Doctors at the city’s public hospital were confronting a huge problem: Thousands of patients, many of them Black or Latino, were arriving in very bad condition — and they were sent there by private hospitals in the city that refused to treat them. Most of them did not have health insurance.

Chicago wasn’t alone. Doctors working in public hospitals around the country reported similar issues. Media reports, including one of a pregnant woman who delivered a stillborn baby after being turned away by two hospitals because she didn’t have insurance, intensified public pressure on politicians to act.

Congress drafted legislation with Republican Sen. David Durenberger of Minnesota saying at the time , “Americans, rich or poor, deserve access to quality health care. This question of access should be the government’s responsibility at the federal, state, and local levels.”

Then-President Ronald Reagan, a Republican, signed the bill into law in 1986.

WHAT HAPPENS IF A HOSPITAL TURNS AWAY A PATIENT?

The hospital is investigated by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. If they find the hospital violated a patient’s right to care, they can lose their Medicare funding, a vital source of revenue for most hospitals to keep their doors open.

Usually, however, the federal government issues fines when a hospital violates EMTALA. They can add up to hundreds of thousands of dollars.

WHY IS THE SUPREME COURT LOOKING AT THE LAW?

Since the Supreme Court overturned the constitutional right to an abortion, President Joe Biden, a Democrat, has repeatedly reminded hospitals that his administration considers an abortion part of the stabilizing care that EMTALA requires facilities to provide.

The Biden administration argues that Idaho’s law prevents ER doctors from offering an abortion if a woman needs one in a medical emergency.

But Idaho’s attorney general has pointed out that EMTALA also requires hospitals to consider the health of the “unborn child” in its treatment, too.

WHAT ARE ADVOCATES SAYING?

Anti-abortion advocates argue that state laws banning abortion can coexist with the federal law that requires hospitals to stabilize pregnant patients in an emergency.

The prominent anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America called the lawsuit in Idaho a “PR stunt,” in a statement to The Associated Press on Tuesday.

“The EMTALA case is based on the false premise that pregnant women cannot receive emergency care under pro-life laws,” said Kelsey Pritchard, the group’s state public affairs director. “It is a clear fact that pregnant women can receive miscarriage care, ectopic pregnancy care and treatment in a medical emergency in all 50 states.”

But many doctors say it’s not as clear cut as anti-abortion advocates claim. Idaho’s state law banning abortion, except for the life of the mother, has left some doctors weighing if a patient is close enough to death to treat.

Most other states allow doctors to perform abortions to save the health of a mother. But, if the Supreme Court rules in Idaho’s favor, it could invite other states to pass restrictions without that exemption.

In a statement released Monday, Jack Resneck, the former president of the American Medical Association, said Idaho’s law forces doctors to withhold proper treatment for patients.

The state’s “dangerous standard cannot be applied to the real-life situations faced in emergency departments every day,” Resneck said. “There is no bright line when each patient’s condition suddenly reaches “life-threatening,” and deteriorating patients don’t want their physicians delaying care.”

More in News

Hurricanes | Hurricane center monitors disturbance in Atlantic. Yes, it’s only April

Chicago’s ‘rat hole’ removed after city determines sidewalk with animal impression was damaged

SUBSCRIBER ONLY

Tourism | disney world’s fire department gets rebranded.

Local News | Regina Hill seeks a rehearing after judge put permanent injunction on her