Document: 510 U.S. 163 WEISSv.UNITED STATES No. 92-1482. Supreme Court of United States. Argued November 3, 1993. Decided January 19, 1994.* After courts-martial sentenced petitioners Weiss and Hernandez, States Marines, on their pleas guilty to offenses under the Uniform Code Military Justice (UCMJ), convictions were affirmed by Navy-Marine Corps Review in separate appeals. In affirming Weiss' conviction, Appeals rejected his contentions, first, that military trial appellate judges have no authority convict because method appointment various Judge Advocates General UCMJ violates Appointments Clause, U. S. Const., Art. II, § 2, cl. and, second, such judges' lack a fixed term office Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause. Based this decision, court summarily Hernandez' conviction. Held: 1. The current appointing does not violate which, inter alia, requires President appoint "Officers States" with advice consent Senate. All involved these cases already commissioned officers when they assigned serve as judges, thus had been appointed pursuant position judge is so different from other positions which an officer may be Congress has implication required second Clause before discharge judicial duties. fact possess certain qualifications, including membership state or federal bar, itself indicate congressional intent create office, since special qualifications are needed fill host positions. Moreover, UCMJ's explicit exclusive treatment who must "detailed" "assigned" superior quite Congress' number top-level hierarchy, Chairman Joint Chiefs Staff, for expressly required. Nor its own force require appointment. Buckley v. Valeo, 424 1, subsequent decisions simply do speak question. present case also distinguishable Shoemaker States, 147 282. Even assuming, arguendo, "germaneness" principle set forth Shoemaker, id., at 300-301, applies situation, necessary role "germane" officer: By contrast civilian society, non-judicial play significant part administration justice; same token, less distinct than full-time offices society. Pp. 169-176. 2. Neither Mathews Eldridge, 319, nor Medina California, 505 437, provides due process analysis appropriate context, deference determinations apogee. Rather, standard found Middendorf Henry, 425 25, 44: whether factors militating favor terms extraordinarily weighty overcome balance struck Congress. historical Anglo-American system never tenure factor weighed calculation. applicable provisions UCMJ, corresponding regulations, sufficiently insulate effects command influence. Thus, neither history practice supports petitioners' assumption lacks independence ensure impartiality, fallen far short satisfying standard. 176-181. 36 M. J. 224 37 252, affirmed. REHNQUIST, C. J., delivered opinion Court, BLACKMUN, STEVENS, O'CONNOR, KENNEDY, SOUTER, GINSBURG, JJ., joined, Scalia Thomas, joined Parts I II-A. filed concurring opinion, post, p. 182. 194. SCALIA, judgment, THOMAS, 195. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED COURT OF MILITARY APPEALS. Alan B. Morrison argued cause petitioners. With him briefs Philip D. Cave, Dwight H. Sullivan, Eugene R. Fidell, Ronald W. Meister. Solicitor Days brief Acting Assistant Attorney Keeney, Deputy Bryson, Paul Larkin, Jr., Thomas E. Booth, Theodore G. Hess, Albert Diaz.† CHIEF JUSTICE REHNQUIST Court. 1 We decide Constitution, conclude constitutional provision violated. 2 Petitioner Weiss, Marine, pleaded court-martial one count larceny, violation Article 121 (UCMJ Code), 10 921. He was three months confinement, partial forfeiture pay, bad-conduct discharge. possession, importation, distribution cocaine, 112a, 912a, conspiracy, 81, 881. 25 years all reduction rank, dishonorable convening reduced sentence 20 confinement. 3 Review, appeals, convictions. granted plenary review petitioner address contention appointments violated Relying recent decision Graf, 35 450 (1992), cert. pending, 92-1102, unanimously held argument. 224, 235, n. (1992). splintered petitioner's challenge. 4 Two five concluded initial sufficient satisfy Id., 225-234 (plurality opinion). A taking duties unnecessary, according plurality, justice germane Ibid. One concurred result only, concluding apply military. 234-240 (opinion Crawford, J.). two dissented separately. Both stressed changes brought about Act 1968, particularly added newly created judge, both performed See 240-256 (Sullivan, dissenting), 256-263 (Wiss, dissenting). 5 accordingly court, unpublished Judgt. order reported 252 (1993). Hernandez then jointly petitioned our review, we certiorari. 508 939 6 It will help understanding issues briefly contours within system. Pursuant established tiers courts. I, 8, 14. At level courts-martial, there types: summary, special, general. summary adjudicates only minor offenses, jurisdiction over servicemembers, can conducted consent. presided single impose up month confinement relatively modest punishments. Arts. 16(3), 20, §§ 816(3), 820. 7 usually consists members,1 although allows members sit without accused elect tried alone. 16(2), 816(2). most but it punishment greater six hard labor discharge, temporary grade. 819. general either least members, alone if requests. 16(1), 816(1). any lawful sentence, death. 18, 818. 8 officially existed passage acts presiding court-martial. 26, 826. rules legal questions, instructs regarding law procedures followed. 51, 851. guilt innocence unless, course, No imposed becomes final until approved convened 60, 860. 9 Armed Forces2 bar State's highest court. selected certified qualified Advocate branch Forces.3 They perform General. While serving also, approval General, tasks unrelated There approximately 74 currently preside courts-martial. An additional next tier four Courts each Army, Air Force, Coast Guard, Corps. These courts, three-judge panels, more involves dismissal officer, punitive enlisted servicemember. 66, 866. courts de novo factual findings, overturn sentences. Appellate civilians, member Like term. presently 31 judges. 11 Atop Appeals, President, Senate, 15 years. 67, 142, 867, 942 (1988 ed., Supp. IV). issue here. 12 * II Constitution reads follows: 13 "[The President] shall nominate, Advice Consent Ambassadors, public Ministers Consuls, Judges supreme Officers whose herein otherwise provided for, Law: Law vest Appointment inferior Officers, think proper, alone, Law, Heads Departments." 14 begin common ground. parties dispute responsibilities possess, act "Officers" Freytag Commissioner, 501 868 (1991) (concluding Tax officers); 126 (1976) ("[A]ny appointee exercising laws `Officer States,' must, therefore, manner prescribed [the Clause]"). agreement, rightly so, officers. As said Buckley, "all accordance . class type excluded functions." 132 (emphasis original). follows those cases, however, judges,4 Senate.5 question answer, another assuming Petitioners contend has, implication, appointment, command, one. reject arguments. 16 Petitioners' argument based bar. But themselves not, believe, aseparate office. Special duties; yet could seriously lawyer pilot, example, performing qualifications. 17 ignores hesitated confirmation Senate including: Vice 152, 154; Chief Naval Operations, 5033, 5035; Commandant Marine Corps, 5043, 5044; Surgeons Navy, 3036, 5137, 8036; Personnel, 5141; Chaplains, 5142; 3037, 5148, 8037. 18 respect positions, spoken differently. Staff "general detailed positions." 3035 added). assistants Secretary Navy. 5045. Commissioned "may duty" American Red Cross Secretary. 711a. Secretaries departments assign detail armed forces" inspectors buildings owned occupied abroad 713. Navy assign" custodians foreign embassies consulates. 5983. And "detail" superintendents instructors nautical schools. This contrasting indicates rather clearly repeatedly consistently distinguished between would duty officer. 19 sections relating explicitly exclusively "assign"; nowhere mention made Section 826(a) "detail[ed]" court-martial, designated designee, 826(c), Service prescribes regulation what persons authorized them. 866, turn, "assigned Review." designates chief determines "on panels senior panel." offices, wished already-commissioned occupy difference negates permissible inference intended should receive fit absentmindedness forgot say so. 21 alternative even did intend force. urge upon us support (1976), (1991), Olson, 487 654 (1988). undoubtedly establish analytical framework base conclusion "officer States"—a proposition agree. whether, when, 22 lead dissenting opinions devoted considerable attention to, extensively briefed, significance 282 (1893). enacted statute establishing commission supervise development Rock Creek Park District Columbia. Three remaining Engineers Army Engineer Commissioner latter officers, contended again new argument, saying: 23 "[T]he is, while cannot officer; As, eligibility questioned time theretofore confirmed that, duties, them, devolved them act, doubted, frequently case, increase power existing thereby rendering incumbent nominated appointed." 300-301. 24 differ several respects, purposes analysis. doubt prompted Court's description being "while officer." looking "germane," sought circumventing unilaterally here indefinite among hundreds perhaps thousands short, ground suspicion trying select particular individual effected "diffusion power," expressed concern Freytag, supra, 878. assume, satisfied enacting 1950, through statutory changes, gradually changed come closely resemble important respects remains "specialized society society," Parker Levy, 417 733, 743 (1974). Although obviously unique functions, consistent long tradition, operation 26 "quell quarrels, frays, disorders subject UCMJ] apprehend take therein." 7(c), 807(c). Commanding nonjudicial disciplinary intervention includes correctional custody, grade, extra restriction limits, detention pay. 15, 815. When acting president conducts proceedings resolves handled except challenge against judge. Convening authorities, finally, modify justice. 27 noted, "inherent detailed. Until specific grade rank." 228. similarly exercise functions Review. moreover, period he deems appropriate, reassigned perform, permission responsibilities. 26(c), 826(c). Whatever might 28 sum, believe scheme satisfies clear equally 29 recognize, life ex rel. Toth Quarles, 350 11, (1955). lacking accused's rights. Palmore 411 389, 410 (1973). confine assertion some length time—however short. 30 Congress, requirements legislating area affairs, measure protection defendants proceedings. Rostker Goldberg, 453 57, 67 (1981); 43 (1976). determining due, "must give determination regulate land naval forces, 8." 334-335 Government contends 437 supplies framework. Medina, arose recognized past "the tests limitations [of process] context." Rostker, 67. arises contemplates "plenary control rights, Establishment, procedures, remedies related discipline." Chappell Wallace, 462 296, 301 (1983). Judicial "is apogee" reviewing decisionmaking area. 70. Our extends rights servicemembers: "Congress primary responsibility delicate task balancing servicemen needs [W]e adhered variety contexts where, here, implicated." Solorio 483 435, 447-448 (1987). 32 therefore Middendorf, where faced facet servicemembers appearing assisted counsel, asked "whether counsel Congress." S., 44. ask 33 elementary "a fair tribunal basic requirement process." re Murchison, 349 133, 136 component impartial ibid.; Tumey Ohio, 273 510, 532 (1927). Petitioners, allege appeared biased. Instead, assume impartiality. practice, assumption. 34 traditional system, tradition. early English tribunals, served model historically tenured presided. Schlueter, Court-Martial: Historical Survey, 87 Mil. L. Rev. 129, 135, 136-144 (1980). numerous occasions during revised governing hear immediate appeals therefrom.6 Winthrop, Precedents 21-24, 953-1000 (2d ed. 1920) (describing reprinting Articles War, governed 17th 18th centuries); F. Gilligan & Lederer, Court-Martial Procedure 11-24 20th-century revisions enactment amendments UCMJ). Indeed, mentioned, 1968. Courts-martial country 200 presence 150 all. B observed 462, maintenance "suggests absence fundamental fairness problem." effect disregard history, unwilling mean accepted automatically today. taken affirmative steps make like justice, nonetheless chosen existence end itself. means promoting independence, turn helps insulating influence, preserve impartiality 38 places Rather exacerbating alleged problems suggest, structure protect independence. accountable performance placing interest outcome achieved acceptable accountability. 39 protects unlawful influence precluding commanding preparing report concerning effectiveness, fitness, efficiency prohibits authorities censuring, reprimanding, admonishing "with findings adjudged conduct proceeding." 837. Any "knowingly intentionally fails enforce comply" "shall punished direct." 98, 898. appellate, refrain adjudicating previously participated, 26(c),66(h), 866(h), cause, 41, 841. learn identity choosing members. 16, 816. 40 entire overseen composed entirely That demonstrated vigilance checking attempts exert improper Mabe, considered rate appropriateness judge's sentences later described: "We [in Mabe] inconsistent establishment `judge' Code." 465. decertified transferred General's Ibid.7 41 matter safeguards place demonstrating favoring 42 For reasons stated, attacks convicted heard judgments Affirmed. Notes: Together withHernandez certiorari (see Rule 12.2). &#x2020; Briefs amici curiae urging reversal Civil Liberties Union et al. David Isbell, John Vanderstar, Resnicoff, Steven Shapiro, Arthur Spitzer; Force Defense Division Robert I. Smith, Jay Cohen, Frank Spinner. Court-martial personnel, depending status accused; members' analogous somewhat than, jurors. 825 531 service principal service. 3037 (Army), 5148 (Navy-Marine Corps), 8037 (Air Force); 1(1), 801(1) (Coast Guard) constitutionality allowing civilians presents 66(a), 866(a). record contain complete information careers possible once 624 promoted higher grade—e. g., captain major, didcreate nine-member 1983 examine,interalia, possibility providing 1983, Pub. 98-209, 9(b), 97 Stat. 1393, 1404-1405 published year later, recommended guaranteed Criminal Justice: Practice 33-34, nn. 86, (3d 1992) (listing describing report). further action subject. limitation remove refutes unfettered discretion concurring. join ordinary "inferior officers" meaning Because raise difficult today decides if, argue, "principal officers," write separately explain why Under appoint" (or called seeMorrison 654, 670 (1988); (1976)). "[B]ut none otherwise. Though permits 240,000 active Department Defense, Manpower Statistics (Mar. 31, 1993) (Table 9)) 670-673 (outlining criteria officer). declined adopt onerous available authorizes relevant Forces meets going knowledge experience. ante, 168. If, ranks questions. received commissions post multiperson office's occupants, choice lower Executive Branch official, principal-officer after 1968 included potential individuals occupy, inferior-officer answered negative. "The very divides into classes," Germaine, 99 508, 509 (1879), though broad see Myers 272 52, 128-129 (1926), President's assent, Constitution's distinction particular, dispense precise directly "by indirection." Springer Philippine Islands, 277 189, 202 (1928). Accordingly, find consider but, Clause's origins my reading text. framing judicious choice" Union, Federalist 76, (J. Cooke 1961) (A. Hamilton), delegates Philadelphia Convention draw experiences flawed methods aware pre-revolutionary "`manipulation official appointments'" Crown colonial governors, "one revolutionary generation's greatest grievances executive power."Freytag 868, 883 (quoting Wood, Creation Republic 1776-1787, 79 (1969)). postrevolutionary abuse legislatures reaction, given sole appointment; lodging "`had become source division faction states.'" 904, (SCALIA, judgment) 407). error overcorrection behind Framers came appreciate necessity separating degree (a assumed belong Congress) good reason initiative single-person presidency, multimember Legislature. pose much risk Congress: "a[n] incautious corrupt nomination." Farrand, Records Federal 1787, (rev. 1937) Madison) (hereinafter Farrand). Just grant nominate avert legislative despotism, "excellent check" Presidential missteps wrongdoing. 513.1 Accord, Story, Commentaries 374-377 (1833) (The likely large [legislative] body" "qualifications unquestioned, unquestionable"; abused," "salutary confirmation, "[t]he consciousness check circumspect, deliberate nominations office"). Framers' thinking, settled selecting "judicious" empowering other, hold Senators injudicious appointments. circumstances attending officer], mode conducting it, naturally matters notoriety," Hamilton wrote; "and loss determine actors." 77, 517. result, blame bad nomination fall singly absolutely. censure rejecting lie door senate; aggravated consideration having counteracted intentions executive. If ill nominating senate approving participate degrees opprobrium disgrace." strategy then, familiar enough: separates Government's intermingling, accountability "preclude arbitrary power." 293 (Brandeis, strict carried flexibility thought who, definition, governmental authority. Farrand 627. allowed still structured power: Congress's make, President's, limited assigning highly heads departments, or, law. structural benefits designed provide preserved, read forbid ways defeated. First, aggrandize expense another. 128-129. office; Senate's concurrence, authorization.2 Second, abdicate authorize confirmation; allow officer.3 To sure, "power encroaching nature" usurped surrendered. 48, 332 Madison). reason, (like separation-of-powers generally) typically addressed allegations aggrandizement abdication. See, e. supra; 189 (1928); (1893).4 Nevertheless, interests protected Republic," "[n]either agree waive th[e] protection[s]" provides. 880. forbids abdication.5 C legislation adopted signed amount impermissible abdication political branches carry creation filling indeed Such preclude playing parts essential preventing encouraging response objection Otherwise, post-1968 reflect branches' Admittedly, extreme prior setting, theoretically Judging immaterial. confirming literally tens would, could, adequately focus remote small eventually judges.6 formal selection actually likewise deprives realistic ability easily identifiable elected officials account Thus while, explains, 171-172, certainly attempted combines inferior- roles, disregarding reasons, serious problem indeed, conceded oral Tr. Oral Arg. 30-31. D frivolous. proceeds analogizing III circuit district officers,7 suggests too (since, held, officers). identified Olson "limited tenure," phrase used describe "appoint[ment] essentially accomplish [at which] terminated." 672. jurisdiction," refer independent investigate prosecute individuals, crimes, scope ibid. Over seem [in] duties" 671. removable, true "most (if all) Branch." 716 dissenting) deleted). response. Since akin analogy proves nothing be. justifies declaring "inferior" holds "Cour[t] Law" envisions compare poorly rulings fact-finding sentencing scrutiny 866(c). powers correspondingly greater, removable 7443(f), freely assignments.8 171-172. 15-year terms, 7443(e), years.9 Brief (military "often two, three, years"). line `inferior' `principal' clear," Morrison, 671, deal ultimately certainty side fall. decided how resolve area; understood "clearly" Forced now, approach offered then-Judge Ginsburg her independent-counsel case. "Where... label better fits fairly debatable, fully rational surely merits... tolerance." Sealed Case, 838 2d 476, (CADC) (dissenting opinion), rev'd sub nom. shows judgment limits assignment respected SCALIA give, addresses opinion. Hamilton's Papers writings thorough contemporary justification adopted. Nos. 76 pp. 509-521. ought initially nominate: undivided man beget livelier sense exact regard reputation. feel himself stronger obligations, interested care qualities requisite stations filled, prefer fairest pretentions them." 510-511. left ultimate vital: "To purpose co-operation Senate? concurrence powerful, silent operation. excellent spirit favoritism tend greatly prevent unfit characters State prejudice, family connection, personal attachment, view popularity." 513. notes Constitutional Convention, first suggest process. 128; Harris, (1953). Gouvernor Morris, vesting 82, defended shared "as responsibility, concur, security." 539. Elliot, Debates 134 (1891) (James Iredell North Carolina ratifying convention) ("[T]he restraint [The provides] double security"). generally 17-26 (summarizing debates conventions). Papers, replete expressions fear Legislative National branches,"Buckley 129 threat expanding power, specifically context 101 (G. Mason); 103 (B. Franklin). language halves attempt offices. Warren, Making 642 (1937)(discussing references "`established Law,'" "`Congress law'" specified). doubt, I's makes candidate others. gives encroach, forced invalidate usurp authority, recognized: execute belonging 123 (citing Youngstown Sheet Tube Co. Sawyer, 343 579 (1952)). InFreytag 884 "diffusion" "ensure wielded people." 884. Depending circumvent implicate anti-aggrandizement antiabdication principle. full creates fills diffuse requires; aggrandizement. Cf. 519 (explaining House Representatives body appointments). approval, theme absent, however. InMorrison (1988), authorizing panel confirmation. nevertheless represent CfJ. Hampton, 276 394, 406 (1928) (Taft, J.) ("[I]t breach transfers branch, invest power"). Taft's remark suggests, ready "nondelegation doctrine." invalidated delegated "to others vested," A. Schechter Poultry Corp. 295 495, 529 (1935); 553-554 (Cardozo, concurring), statutes narrowly avoid annulling excessive abdications Industrial Dept., AFL-CIO Petroleum Institute, 448 607, 646 (1980) opinion); Cable Television Assn., Inc. 415 336, 342 672-676 (REHNQUIST, (discussing delegation power). Nondelegation doctrine criticized. Ely, Democracy Distrust 131-134 (distinguishing non-delegation defensible theories invoked strike down New Deal legislation). Barring strikes me plainly problematic, text describes precision nature powers. Writing 1953, observer pointed out 49,956 sent 1949 "were minute , 832 hours pass [or] average day session." 331. "Senate practical empty formality."Ibid. refers Courts." III, days construction uniformly [judges courts] not... 456, (1833), many disagree. InFreytag, "ambassadors, ministers, judges" Shartel, Judges—Appointment, Supervision, Removal—Some Possibilities Mich. 485, 499-529 (1930) (arguing should, constitutionally can, Justice). According Government, [Uniform Justice] services' implementing regulations carefully impartial." 42. repel claim, strengthens position. strengthen enough, array "military equivalent form stable tours duty."Id., 31. Again, defense challenge, aids remains, analyze claims demonstrates men women leave enter Today's upholds notably sensitive concerns prevailing country's done legally trained peremptory rejection pleas. close inspection reflected confirms: "[I]t function properly coming constituting treated honored charity commander. entitled equal conceived generosity commander written Constitution...." Winters 89 Ct. 59-60, Ed. 80, 84 (1968) (Douglas, chambers). Frontiero Richardson, 677 (1973); Harmon Brucker, 355 (1958); Crawford Cushman, 1114 (CA2 1976). whom THOMAS joins, judgment. provides, former: states fromShoemaker (1893), because, "hundreds 174, (as enlarged) office," 174. distinguishes leads need (though anyway, 174-176). Germaneness conducted, seems me, whenever assure conferring Violation occurs Shoemaker) aggrandizing (by effectively appropriating duties), itself, lodges person specifies. confer anyone few recipients specified Clause—i. e., Departments. these. Therefore, nongermane giving thousands" selections made. "Offic[e]" comply strictures II. dictum germane.* pronounce accountability," 180. today's "has tradition," 178. "Courts-martial ... judge," 179. people's representatives "balance accountability" "acceptable" Justices gave procedural protection, enjoyed Amendment ever since. arrogates possess. "[A] law, forbidden, show sanction usage England [That which], substance, immemorially actual law." Hurtado 110 516, 528 (1884). sometimes ironically happens seek deny restrain decrees, see, Burnham Superior Cal., County Marin, 495 604, 637-639 (1990) (Brennan, judgment), consequence practice. finds "an "protects duties"; "prohibits `. any. .. proceeding' "; decertify transfer "based sentences." Ante, 180, 181. suppose similar protections suffice validate criminal-law felonies pleasure Executive. am confident mere prohibitions demands 1700, Baker, Introduction Legal History 145-146 1979), almost former colonies Revolution, Ziskind, Tenure Constitution: Precedents, 1969 138-147, today, Center Courts, Conference Administrators, Organization 1987, 271-302 (It noteworthy recited King George Declaration Independence "[h]e dependent Will offices.") says merely [the] calculation," 179, differing tradition utterly conclusive. be: "[N]o procedure firmly rooted practices people `fundamentally unfair' Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Haslip, 499 concurring). concur II-A perceptively discussed SOUTER'S concurrence—namely, (and, officer)—were wisely avoided inadequately presented argued. Petition Certiorari only: "There `superior' event, ." Pet. Cert. 12. reference statement "if transgression original substitute office." 15. demonstrates, complex; resolved briefing

Category: 1