
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: THURSDAY, January 20, 1994                   TAG: 9401200064
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL                    PAGE: A-9   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: Associated Press
DATELINE: WASHINGTON                                LENGTH: Medium

MILITARY JUSTICE SYSTEM PRESERVED

The Supreme Court spared the military justice system a great disruption Wednesday by ruling that the armed services may continue appointing and using judges who have no fixed terms of office.

The justices unanimously rejected a double-barreled constitutional attack against the military court system.

Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote for the court that military rules and regulations "sufficiently preserve judicial impartiality" by "insulating judges from the effects of command influence."

The court resolved two separate issues in favor of the military:

It said the Constitution's requirement that the president appoint all "officers of the United States" does not mean that military officers need a separate presidential appointment before they can serve as judges.

It ruled that the lack of fixed terms for court-martial judges and middle-tier appellate judges does not violate the due-process rights of criminal defendants who appear before them.

"The absence of tenure as a historical matter in the system of military justice, and the number of safeguards in place to ensure impartiality, lead us to reject [the] due-process challenge," Rehnquist said.

The military's court-martial and appellate judges are appointed by the judge advocate general and can be removed or transferred at his discretion.

Arguing for the military in November, Solicitor General Drew Days told the court that military judges, unlike their civilian counterparts, do not need protection "from the pressures of the political process."

Days said there is no significant risk that a military judge will reach a decision merely to please commanding officers.

In other matters, the court:

Upheld 7-2 an Indiana man's death sentence for a 1981 killing even though his jury failed to say the crime was an intentional murder.

Heard arguments in an Illinois case asking the justices to decide whether garbage-to-energy plants run by local governments must treat the ash they produce as hazardous waste.

Heard arguments over a dangerous-drug tax imposed by most states. A Montana family convicted of growing marijuana on its farm successfully challenged the tax in lower courts as an unconstitutional second punishment.

by CNB