The Legal Assistance Division of the Offce of the Staff Judge Advocate is committed to providing quality legal assistance services to all eligible clients, including active-duty/activated Soldiers, Military Retirees & Family Members. While we cannot represent you in court, we can provide you preliminary advice on a wide variety of legal issues & may be able to provide civilian attorney referrals, depending on your situation.
![]()
Links to commercial sites does not constitute endorsement by the US Army nor does the US Army take responsibility for the content or the handicap accessibility of those sites.
Branch Insignia
Regimental Insignia
Branch PlaqueWhile GEN Washington wanted a judge advocate to
oversee the administration of military justice, his concerns also
reflected the larger debate about justice and legal authority that was
fueling the American Revolution. The new Nation envisioned by the Founding
Fathers was a bold social and political experiment: the 'Rule of Law'
would replace the 'Divine Right of Kings.' This Rule of Law was grounded
in respect: government would respect individual rights and freedoms, and
in return, individuals would respect the government's obligation to
regulate and enforce standards of behavior. It is the Rule of Law, in both
civilian life and in the military, that ensures Order, Justice, and
Equality. In any event, since the Revolution, the American
Army has had its own lawyers - who assist commanders in enforcing Army standards and reinforcing Army Values: Loyalty, Duty, Respect,Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity & Personal Courage.
Soldiers thrive when they know that they will be treated equally & that rules &
regulations apply to all, regardless of rank or assignment. Judge
advocates have always played a critical role in ensuring that these
standards and values are obeyed.
![]()
Early years through Civil War period
Judge advocates served with honor and distinction
in the early years of the Republic. In the Civil War era, Army lawyers
played prominent roles in two historic legal events at the end of the
conflict: The Lincoln Assassination Trials and the Trial of Captain Henry
Wirz, commandant of the infamous Andersonville prison camp.
![]()
World War I
MAJ Marion W. Howze
At the beginning of World War I, the Judge Advocate General had a "Department" of 17 military lawyers. By December 1918, however, his department had expanded---along with the rest of the American Army---to 426 judge advocates. In any event, the increasing numbers of judge advocates also allowed the role of the Corps to expand;commanders turned to judge advocates for advice in both legal & non-legal matters. Thus, for example, MG Enoch H. Crowder, who had served
as the Judge Advocate General since 1911, was appointed Provost Marshal
during World War I. While serving in this non-judge advocate assignment,
Crowder prepared the Selective Service Act of 1917 & supervised the
registration, classification & induction of nearly three million men in
the armed services. In the meantime, rather fierce-looking officers like
MAJ Marion W. Howze, performed more traditional legal work in the Judge
Advocate General's Department. Howze, a 1903 graduate of the US Military
Academy at West Point, was a judge advocate in France with the American
Expeditionary Force (AEF).
MG
Blanton Winship
And then, of course, there were always judge
advocates who could 'do it all'---like COL Blanton Winship. Winship, a
Georgia native and graduate of Mercer University's law school, commanded
two infantry regiments while also serving as Judge Advocate of the First
Army. He was more than equal to the challenge, for his extraordinary
heroism and gallantry in combat earned him the Distinguished Service Cross
and Silver Star. COL Winship went on to become The Judge Advocate General
in 1931, and the Signal Center and Fort Gordon Staff Judge Advocate's
office is named "Winship Hall" in his honor.
LTC Edward S. Thurston
After the war ended in France, judge advocates
continued serving areas where fighting continued. Thus, for example, LTC
Edward S. Thurston deployed with U.S. troops to Murmansk, in northern
Russia in 1919. As the only lawyer in the AEF-North Russia, LTC Thurston
was responsible for the administration of military justice, and he
reviewed more than 250 courts-martial cases between August 1918 and April
1919.
MAJ Albert J.
Galen
Thousands of miles away, in Vladivostok, Siberia,
MAJ Albert J. Galen served as the sole American lawyer in the AEF-Siberia.
Like Thurston, he endured months of bitter cold, snow and ice.
And, like his colleague in Murmansk, MAJ Galen also faced a variety of
legal issues. Galen, for example, researched the legal ramifications of a
marriage between an American soldier and a Russian citizen. Was a marriage
performed by a Russian Orthodox priest 'legal' under U.S. law? Should an
Army chaplain instead perform it? Could the new wife return with her
soldier husband to the U.S.?
![]()
Some issues were more somber...
The 'Red' or Bolshevik forces battled constantly
with the 'White' or non-communist forces, and the American soldiers were
often caught in the middle. Moreover, neither the 'Reds' or 'Whites' had
much interest in the observing the customary laws of land warfare;
prisoners of war were not ordinarily taken. The Americans, however,
accepted the surrender of combatants, and MAJ Galen served as the
command's representative on the "Allied Commission of Prisoners of
War." No doubt Galen observed that Bolsheviks falling into American
hands fared better than those who did not. In this photograph, for
example, Czech soldiers allied with the 'White' forces have just captured
this group of Bolsheviks. They were executed a short time later.
In 1940, the Army was once again preparing for war.
The legal challenges presented by this buildup were staggering, and now
Army lawyers were making policy recommendations as well as providing legal
advice and opinions. When the threat of war became reality, judge
advocates would once again be tested on the battlefield as well as in the
courtroom.
COL Thomas H. Green
After the Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbor,
the operational tempo increased markedly for judge advocates. Some were
immediately called upon to handle missions of incredible importance and
sensitivity. In Hawaii, for example, COL Thomas H. Green, who had been
serving as Staff Judge Advocate for the Hawaiian Department, assumed
duties as the executive to the military governor. In that position, Green
was largely responsible for promulgating and issuing orders and other
measures implementing the transition from civil government to military
government on December 7, 1941. In most cases, these orders were without
precedent and required the broadest legal knowledge in order to make them
properly effective. As a practical matter, COL Green was largely
responsible for the day-to-day operation of the military government in the
Territory of Hawaii.
1LT Samuel Spitzer
Combat in the European Theater of Operations was
bloody and brutal. 1LT Samuel E. Spitzer was well aware of this on the
morning of July 31, 1944. Laying down his weapons, Spitzer walked down the
center of a small French town, calling out in German for the German
soldiers to surrender. As a result, 508 Germans were captured. Spitzer's
bold action saved numerous American lives, and for his courage, the young
lieutenant was awarded the Silver Star.
COL Hubert E. Miller
While Spitzer received the Silver Star as a judge
advocate, others who would later serve in the Corps were being recognized
for their personal courage. Thus, for example, then infantry 1LT Hubert E.
Miller (pictured here as the Staff Judge Advocate, 1st Logistical Command, Vietnam, in 1966) received the Distinguished Service Cross for extraordinary heroism in Normandy in 1944. A superb athlete,
Miller later participated in the 1952 Olympic Games (four-man bobsled),
becoming the only judge advocate to compete in the Games while a member of
the Corps.
MG
Myron C. Cramer (center)

But World War II was not just about "judge
advocates in combat." Recognizing that they would enhance mission
success if the Corp assisted soldiers with their personal legal problems,
the Corps' leaders established a formal "Legal Assistance Plan."
In this photograph, taken at the Army-Navy Country Club in March 1944, MG
Myron C. Cramer, TJAG, and other dignitaries, celebrate the 1st anniversary of the Army legal assistance program.
The end of World War II thrust Army lawyers into a
new area. Judge advocates assisted with the prosecution of Nazi Party
leaders for "Crimes Against Humanity" at the International
Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, Germany. Trials also were conducted in
Tokyo, where Japanese war criminals were prosecuted.
Less publicized were the trials of the rank and
file military personnel who had actually committed or ordered war crimes.
The Judge Advocate General's Department supervised these trials, and judge
advocates participated in many of them as prosecutors. In many of these
trials, Army lawyers also served as defense counsel to ensure that German
and Japanese defendants received adequate legal representation.
![]()
Courts-martial from Chaos
Finally, there were courts-martial arising out of the chaos of war that had nothing
to do with war crimes. In 1946, for example, COL Jack Durant and his wife,
CPT Kathleen Nash, were court-martialed for stealing jewels belong to the
House of Hesse. These "crown" jewels, worth millions of dollars,
had been discovered the year previously by CPT Nash in Schloss
Friederishoff. The Hesse family had hidden the jewels in this schloss,
their family's castle, for safekeeping. After Nash discovered the hiding
place, however, she, Durant, and another officer smuggled the jewels to
the United States. At trial, all three accused claimed that, as looting
was commonplace in Occupied Germany, their misconduct should be excused.
The court members were unconvinced. Durant, shown in this photograph with
his two defense lawyers, received 15 years in jail. Nash received five
years. Much of the Hesse treasure was never found---and remains
unrecovered.
![]()
Creation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice
An immediate effect of a unified Department of
Defense (DoD) in 1947 was the need for a unified criminal code that would
govern all military personnel. As a result, the Uniform Code of Military
Justice (UCMJ) was drafted in 1949, approved in 1950, and took effect on
May 31, 1951 in the midst of the Korean War. The UCMJ was the most
comprehensive change in military law in America's history, providing the
individual soldier with needed legal safeguards and establishing a system
of judicial review comparable to that enjoyed by civilians. Key provisions
included the new right for an enlisted accused to have at least 1/3
enlisted Soldiers on the court-martial panel; prior to the enactment of
the UCMJ, all courts-martial were heard by juries of officers. This photograph shows the first all enlisted
court-martial, convened in France in July 1953.
![]()
Korean
War
The new UCMJ came into effect while the fighting in
Korea was already underway. Judge advocates quickly mastered the new
s
ystem, aided by their legal specialists. It was during this period the
legal specialist series MOS was created, defining the duties and training
of enlisted legal clerks. This was part of a continuing effort to
establish a formal program of instruction and training for Corps personnel
that began in World War II. Pictured to the left is MG
E.M. Brannon (center).
During the Korean War, judge advocates served with
distinction. In this photograph, MG E. M. Brannon, TJAG, confers with BG
Phillip D. Ginder, CG, 45th Infantry Division, in 1953. COL
Claude Reitsel, Jr., SJA, US Eighth Army, looks on.
LTC Howard S. Levie
As the fighting in Korea ended, however, judge
advocates continued to demonstrate their value. For example, COL Howard S.
Levie (shown here as a LTC), an expert in international law, was the key
draftsman of the 1953 Korean Armistice Agreement.
Central to JAG Corps instruction and training was
The Judge Advocate General's School (TJAGSA), which opened at the
University of Michigan law school in September 1942. In the photograph below,
students of an early "JAG School" class pose for a photograph.
5th OCS Class at Ann Arbor
Transforming raw civilians into military attorneys
with good soldier skills required innovative approaches. Consequently, the
Corps ran its own Officer Candidate School (OCS) from 1943 to 1945. In the
first photograph, students in the fifth OCS class take their class
photograph in early 1944. In the second photograph, students of the 10th Officer Candidate class, on the school 'parade ground' at the Univ. of
Michigan, take their oaths as officers in March 1945.
10th
OCS Class at Ann Arbor
At the end of the war, the school was deactivated,
but the need for a permanent training facility was obvious & in 1950,
TJAGSA reopened its doors on Fort Myer, Va. The photograph to the left shows the
members of the first class at Ft. Myer.
1st
TJAGSA Class at Ft Myer
TJAGSA's location in the Washington, D.C. area,
however, was short-lived; in 1951 the school re-located to the grounds of
the University of Virginia in Charlottesville. Today, TJAGSA continues to
be the only American Bar Association accredited law school in the country
that focuses exclusively on military law, and teaches judge advocates and
civilian attorneys from the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Coast
Guard, as well as other agencies outside of the Defense Department.
Legal specialists receive their basic instruction
at Fort Jackson, South Carolina. Because of the high standards required
for legal work, enlisted personnel in the Corps often are very mature and
well-educated. As their careers progress, legal specialists must also
receive advanced training at Charlottesville.
The Corps' warrant officer legal administrators,
who are selected from the ranks of the Corps' legal specialists, receive
their basic training at TJAGSA in Charlottesville. Again, as they progress
in their careers, they receive advanced training at TJAGSA.
One distinguished judge advocate who did much for
TJAGSA was COL William S. Fulton, who served as commandant in the 1970s.
After retiring from active duty, Fulton continued serving the Corps as the
Clerk of Court, U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals, until he finally
retired from Federal service in 1998.
COL William S. Fulton
The complex nature of guerrilla war spawned a host
of complicated legal issues. Just as type of war waged by the North
Vietnamese and Viet Cong demanded non-traditional responses from the
American Army, some judge advocates also realized that the traditional way
of providing legal services was no longer way enough. Consequently, a
number of judge advocates spearheaded unique efforts to enhance mission
success in ways not seen previously. For example, LTC George E. Eblen
(pictured here with South Vietnamese Army Chief of Staff LTG Le Van Ty, in
1962) decided that he should begin monitoring war crimes committed by the
Viet Cong against Americans.
LTC George E. Eblen (left)
Eblen's decision to tape record all interviews of
U.S. personnel claiming mistreatment resulted in a command policy that a
military lawyer participate in all future debriefings involving war
crimes.
COL George S. Prugh(pictured here as TJAG),
likewise initiated a number of non-traditional initiatives.
While serving
as the Staff Judge Advocate at Military Assistance Command, Vietnam, from
1964 to 1966, Prugh created a U.S.-Vietnamese Law Society and arranged for
Vietnamese lawyers to study in the United States. He also established a
legal advisory program that monitored real-world operations of South
Vietnam's criminal justice system. Of particular significance, however,
was COL Prugh's successful effort in persuading the South Vietnamese
military that its conflict with the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese was no
longer an internal civil disorder. This was a significant achievement for,
once its military leaders accepted the international nature of the
conflict, the South Vietnamese government also acceded to this view---and
agreed that the provisions of the Geneva Convention on Prisoners of War
would be applied.
MG George S. Prugh
As always, judge advocates acquitted themselves
with honor and courage on the battlefield. Here, judge advocates assigned
to the 25th Infantry Division "Tropic Lightning" pose
for a photograph in 1970.
Conducting a court-martial in a combat zone could be dangerous, but that was Standard
Operating Procedure in Vietnam. In this photograph, taken in Vietnam
shortly after the enactment of the Military Justice Act of 1968, a trial
counsel swears in a witness at a special court-martial.
Judge
advocate CPT Ken Gray was awarded a Bronze Star medal for meritorious
service in Vietnam. At about the same time, infantry 1LT Mike Nardotti
received a Silver Star for gallantry. Twenty-five years later, they would
serve together on the same team with Mike Nardotti as The Judge Advocate
General and Ken Gray as The Assistant Judge Advocate General. Gray was
also the Corps' first black general officer.
![]()
Post-Vietnam Era & the Birth of
Operational Law
MG Ken Gray
The Army's experience in Vietnam planted the seeds
for an end to the almost exclusive focus of judge advocates on military
justice---and peacetime legal issues. The murders at My Lai, and the
investigations and courts-martial that followed, all culminated in a 1974
Department of Defense Directive tasking Army judge advocates with a new
mission: ensuring that all U.S. military operations complied strictly with
the Law of War. Accomplishing this new responsibility now required Army
lawyers regularly to immerse themselves in many aspects of operational
planning and execution---and thus assume a role that earlier judge
advocates did not see as part of their duties.
A number of perceptive judge advocates realized
that this new legal mission inexorably meant judge advocate integration
into operations at all levels, and they initiated efforts to move the
Corps toward this end. The real catalyst for change, however, occurred in
late 1983, when American forces launched Operation URGENT FURY. The
operation in Grenada was a wake-up call for judge advocates, and the
Corps' leadership now formally recognized that a contingency-oriented Army
did require, in fact, judge advocates adept at handling more than
traditional peacetime legal missions. It was essential that Army lawyers
now be schooled in a new role and a new legal discipline: operational
law---a compendium of domestic, foreign and international law applicable
to U.S. forces engaged in military operations at home and abroad.
Over the next fifteen years, the JAG Corps
reconfigured its assets and training to support this new judge advocate
role. By 1989, when U.S. forces began deploying to Southwest Asia as part
of Operation DESERT SHIELD, the JAG Corps was ready.
Army lawyers and legal specialists worked around
the clock to solve the legal problems created by the rapid deployment to
Saudi Arabia. Commanders at all levels now saw their judge advocates as
important force-multipliers. They were first class attorneys who
prosecuted and defended courts-martial, adjudicated claims, and advised
individual soldiers on a variety of personal legal problems. But, their
new role meant that these same lawyers also contributed to mission success
in countless other ways---from drafting Rules of Engagement and providing
advice on targeting, using combat contracting to purchase special fabric
for force protection, and assisting Division (G-2) intelligence personnel
in gathering war crimes evidence, to constructing bunkers and fighting
positions, investigating friendly fire incidents, and drafting war trophy
policies.
A
critical player in legal decision making at the highest level was COL
Raymond C. Ruppert, the Staff Judge Advocate, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM).
In this photograph, taken at Safwan, Iraq in March 1991, Ruppert stands
next to his boss, GEN H. Norman Scharzkopf, the Commander-in-Chief,
CENTCOM.
With the commencement of DESERT STORM, Army lawyers moved to the front with
their commanders. This photograph shows the three corps-level staff judge
advocates of DESERT STORM. From left to right are COL John Bozeman, XVIII
Airborne Corps, COL Walt Huffman, VII Corps, and COL Bill Hagan, 22d
Support Command. All three looked for new ways for lawyers to enhance
mission success.
The
Soldiers of Force XXI & the Army After Next must be diplomats, managers,
relief workers & police officers as well as warriors. Somalia, Haiti,
Bosnia & Rwanda illustrate the complicated political, economic &
social issues-legal & non-legal-confronting commanders.
It is no
longer unusual, for example, for Army lawyers to work along side judge
advocates from other nations. Thus, while serving as the U.N. Mission in
Haiti Force (UNMIH) Legal Advisor, MAJ Mark S. Ackerman, was assisted by
Canadian judge advocate MAJ Marc B. Philippe. In this photograph, taken in
Port-au-Prince in 1995, Ackerman (left) & Philippe (right) advise COL
Khatak, Commander, Pakistan Contingent, UNMIH Military Force.
The digital battlefield & the increased 'optempo'
of both combat missions and Operations Other Than War will increase &
intensify these challenges. Commanders will require Soldiers who can
recognize issues & provide solutions quickly.
![]()
The JAG Corps is preparing its men & women to
meet these challenges.
To aid them is the new Corps doctrine, enunciated
in FM 27-100, Legal Support to Operations. At long last, men &
women in the Corps have clear guidance on the role of the Army lawyer a&
how legal support to military operations is provided through operational
law & the "Six Core Legal Disciplines" of administrative law,
civil law, claims, international law, legal assistance & military
justice. This doctrinal foundation for legal operations will
allow judge advocates to better serve the Army and while the
metamorphosis of the JAG Corps from an organization of special staff
officers to today's emphasis on judge advocate integration into operations
will continue, the Corps is ready for new challenges in the new
millennium.
![]()
Website Information: This
web page is for informational purposes only & is not meant to
constitute legal advice. The information contained on these pages is
general & the law may apply differently in specific situations.![]()