Court backs army service extension
From correspondents in San Francisco
January 13, 2006
A US soldier who sued the military to protest against the involuntary extension of his service has lost his challenge of the "stop-loss" policy Washington has used to maintain troop levels.
The decision by a three-judge panel of the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals was the latest upholding the military's right to keep soldiers in the service beyond their original contracted time by issuing emergency stop-loss orders.
The case involved a California National Guard soldier – his name is listed in court papers only as John Doe – whose time under arms was extended by 11 months. Doe argued that the extension was an unconstitutional infringement of liberty but the court disagreed.
"Doe's arguments challenging the president's 'stop-loss' authority are not persuasive," Judge Stephen Trott wrote for the three-judge panel. "The 'stop-loss' order extending Doe's enlistment is a valid exercise of presidential power."
The court made a similar ruling last May and that decision was cited in the latest review of the issue.
"As we held in Santiago, the enlistment agreement gave warning in plain language that his service could be extended," the decision said.
Attorney Michael Sorgen said he would ask for a larger 11-judge en banc panel of the 9th Circuit to reconsider the issue.
"The door is still open, but not much," he said.
The all-volunteer US military has used the stop-loss program to maintain troop levels as it lags behind its recruiting goals for its forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Tens of thousands of troops have had their time extended under the program.
Link Here
January 13, 2006
A US soldier who sued the military to protest against the involuntary extension of his service has lost his challenge of the "stop-loss" policy Washington has used to maintain troop levels.
The decision by a three-judge panel of the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals was the latest upholding the military's right to keep soldiers in the service beyond their original contracted time by issuing emergency stop-loss orders.
The case involved a California National Guard soldier – his name is listed in court papers only as John Doe – whose time under arms was extended by 11 months. Doe argued that the extension was an unconstitutional infringement of liberty but the court disagreed.
"Doe's arguments challenging the president's 'stop-loss' authority are not persuasive," Judge Stephen Trott wrote for the three-judge panel. "The 'stop-loss' order extending Doe's enlistment is a valid exercise of presidential power."
The court made a similar ruling last May and that decision was cited in the latest review of the issue.
"As we held in Santiago, the enlistment agreement gave warning in plain language that his service could be extended," the decision said.
Attorney Michael Sorgen said he would ask for a larger 11-judge en banc panel of the 9th Circuit to reconsider the issue.
"The door is still open, but not much," he said.
The all-volunteer US military has used the stop-loss program to maintain troop levels as it lags behind its recruiting goals for its forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Tens of thousands of troops have had their time extended under the program.
Link Here
posted by Kangaroo Brisbane Australia at 8:58 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home