Gillibrand’s long march


The New York senator has fought tirelessly for military justice reforms dealing with rape and sexual assault victims

By

Editorials

December 15, 2022 - 1:32 PM

Senator from New York Kirsten Gillibrand fought for the Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act that removes the decision to prosecute serious crimes in the military from the chain of command. (Pool/Abaca Press/TNS)

Kirsten Gillibrand would not give up. The New York senator labored for a decade to reform how the military justice system works (and doesn’t work). And now she has prevailed. The thousands of annual cases of sexual assault and rape in the ranks will be handled like crimes among civilians, not brushed aside or even ignored by the brass.

The generals and the admirals, stuck in their traditions, wanted to keep military commanders in charge of the prosecutions of major crimes instead of handing it to independent legal professionals, as should have happened long ago. And with the Pentagon’s resistance came resistance from the Pentagon’s pals on Capitol Hill, notably Jack Reed, the West Pointer from Rhode Island chairing the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Even though Gillibrand had a bipartisan two-thirds of the Senate as cosponsors of her Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act, Reed was too powerful and always thwarted the reforms. But Gillibrand was the tougher of the two and this year she won across the board.

Under the measures just tucked into the defense authorization bill, all the judicial powers will be removed from commanders in major crimes, including murder and kidnapping. No longer will officers oversee prosecutions and jury selection in courts martial will be randomized.

The details will determine exactly which offenses will be transferred from the old boy’s club, often without any legal training, to professional prosecutors. A strict chain of command is necessary in wartime as well as in a peacetime military dependent on following orders. But Lady Justice is blind for a reason, not to favor one side over the other in a legal dispute, including a criminal matter. Who you are and who you know shouldn’t be a factor when serious allegations are at issue.

It shouldn’t have taken so very long for Gillibrand to achieve what was obvious at the outset. But senator by senator, she argued her just cause for years. Until this year, when even Reed had to finally agree that this is the better way.

Related