Document: 421 U.S. 21 95 S.Ct. 1365. 43 L.Ed.2d 699 John L. McLUCAS, Secretary of the Air Force, et al., Appellants,v.Raymond G. DeCHAMPLAIN. No. 73—1346. Argued Dec. 9, 1974. Decided April 15, 1975. Syllabus Appellee, an Force master sergeant whose court-martial conviction for violations Art. 134 Uniform Code Military Justice involving, inter alia, unauthorized use classified documents and information, had been reversed improper admission certain evidence, retrial was about to commence, filed this action injunctive relief in Federal District Court against appellant military authorities, asserting that unconstitutionally vague limitations imposed by authorities on defense's pretrial access issue, denied him due process effective assistance counsel. The preliminarily enjoined appellants from proceeding with charges, also any other charges unless civilian defense counsel persons were allowed unlimited material defense. court held circumstances justified exception rule requiring a serviceman exhaust his remedies before federal will interfere proceedings, unconstitutionality clear Courts Appeals decisions Avrech v. Navy, 155 U.S.App.D.C. 352, 477 F.2d 1237, Levy Parker, 3 Cir., 478 772, restrictions placed excessive, appellee adequately shown irreparable injury. Appellants directly appealed under 28 U.S.C. § 1252, which allows appeal 'an interlocutory or final judgment, decree order United States . holding Act Congress unconstitutional civil its agencies, officer employee thereof, as such employee, is party.' Held: 1. Whether three-judge district not required 2282 appellee's claim, case properly since it action, are officers acting their official capacities, 'Act Congress,' 'the basis decision below fact unconstitutional,' Raines, 362 17, 20, 80 S.Ct 519, 522, 4 524. Pp. 27-32 2. Under Court's Parker Levy, 417 733, 94 2547, 41 439, Navy Avrech, 418 676, 3039, 1033, vague, constitutional claim clearly insubstantial must be dismissed. P. 32. 3. Relief squarely precluded Schlesinger Councilman, 420 738, 1300, 591, 'when charged crimes can show no harm than attendant resolution system, courts refrain intervention, hence 'unlimited access' aspect suit dismissed failure state upon granted. 33-34. 367 F.Supp. 1291, vacated remanded. Solicitor Gen. Robert H. Bork, New Haven, Conn., appellants. Leonard B. Boudin, York City, appellee. Mr. POWELL delivered opinion Court. 1 Columbia appellants, five officers,1 DeChamplain's (i) based Justice, 10 934, (ii) whatever 1291 (1973). Court, averring jurisdiction 1252. We postponed jurisdictional question hearing merits. 904, 194, 1152 (1974). hold here 1252 and, finding disposition controlled our intervening 439 (1974), 591 (1975), vacate preliminary injunction remand directions dismiss action. 2 * Article provides, 'crimes offenses capital, subject chapter may guilty, shall taken cognizance general, special, summary according nature degree offense ..' This clause article assimilative provision, conferring over service-connected, non-capital covered specific provisions Code.2 In 1971, preferred provision DeChamplain, sergeant. Specifically, DeChamplain having copied documents, violation 18 793(b), attempted deliver copies person, 793(d). charged, 81 Code, 881, conspiracy communicate information agent foreign government, 50 783(b), 92, 892, obey regulation contacts agents reported. All these premised allegations that, while stationed Thailand, twice company Soviet embassy subsequently found possession 24 ranging classification 'confidential' 'top secret.' general convicted all charges. On appeal, Review inculpatory statements made should have admitted into evidence; therefore remanded new trial.3 affirmed.4 then prepared retry substantially same amended, however, delete pertaining three choosing forgo prosecution rather compromise confidentiality. decided introduce at trial 12 assertedly because connection inadmissible statements. Copies contained record first court-martial, has given full access. Civilian counsel, only unclassified portions thus permitted inspect those issue retrial. authorized chief one legal associate, secretary nine remaining now concern. It restrictions, documents: they examined presence appropriate security clearances; made; written notes remain custody; discussed anyone who At conducted pursuant 839, challenged restrictions. presiding judge sustained but granted team original still applicable themselves. moved various grounds, claiming, unconstitutional. motion. claims petitions extraordinary relief. That petitions,5 stating last occasion '(a) petition substitute appeal.'6 5 second begin November 1973. October 3, he seeking asserting, among claims, defendant lack subject-matter could agreed 'generally martial proceedings.' F.Supp., 1294. believed, rule. Because issues presented 'purely legal' did 'not necessitate determinations forum best equipped make,' 'Sergeant (would) fundamental guarantees' intervened, concluded there justification deferring consideration until after subsequent appellate review. Ibid. 6 further satisfied requirements injunction. ruled 1237 (1973), 772 (CA3 1973), both pending certiorari concern previous 'clearly excessive' abridged right fair trial. 7 Finally, demonstrated injury: confinement if again convicted, would confined review courts.7 'on charges' 'full relevant case' 'and associates assistants, protective order, necessary said counsel's adequate preparation trial.'8 II 8 comes us most unusual posture. Insofar complaint sought enforcement ground asserted unconstitutionality, falls within literal mandate 2282. section provides '(a)n permanent restraining enforcement, operation execution repugnance Constitution thereof application therefor heard determined judges Although neither parties applied convention court, section's requirement jurisdictional, applies single power act. See, e.g., Flemming Nestor, 363 603, 606—607, 1367, 1370—1371, 1435 (1960); Kennedy Mendoza-Martinez, 372 144, 153, 83 554, 559, 9 644 (1963). A judge, want justiciability jurisdiction. Gonzalez Automatic Employees Credit Union, 419 90, 100, 289, 295, 42 249 lacking when insubstantial, i.e., obviously without merit decisions. Ex parte Poresky, 290 30, 32, 54 4, 78 L.Ed. 152 (1933); Idlewild Bon Voyage Liquor Corp. Epstein, 370 713, 715, 82 1294, 1296, 794 (1962); Goosby Osser, 409 512, 518—519, 93 854, 858 859, 35 36 here, consider insubstantial; contrary, motion went grant According deemed unnecessary time filed, statute appeared settled supra, binding Hence, said, seemed present variant, however attenuated, Bailey Patterson, 369 31, 549, 512 (1962), thought itself empowered act 'decision possibly go manner save one.'9 But prediction proved illfounded; subsequently, 1033 consequence this, argued brief 134's constitutionality substantial required. Moreover, so, urges, dismissed.10 11 Appellee bases argument concerning 1253. direct 'from granting denying judges.' face, seem allow grants denies injunction, 2281 'required determined' court. read statute, allowing appeals 'orders actually entered courts.' U.S., 96 n. 14, S.Ct., 293. See Stratton St. Louis S.W.R. Co., 282 10, 15—16, 51 8, 75 135 (1930). And we fails call goes dispose case, lies Appeals. supra; Hicks Pleasure House, Inc., 404 1, 92 5, 6, 30 (1971). premise Section pertinent part: 13 'Any party Supreme suit, 14 requisites met case. action; are, course, States, capacities; Congress.' might deciding determination probability success merits finally 'hold' By terms, well judgments, decrees, orders, previously invoked least if, forms predicate denial equitable Fleming Rhodes, 331 67 1140, 91 1368 (1947). 524 (1960), 15 dismiss, words, erroneously instead acted jurisdiction.11 Such gloss perhaps 'consonant overriding policy, historically encouraged Congress, minimizing mandatory docket 98, 294. think, unambiguously mandated policy narrow identifies. language sufficiently demonstrates purpose: afford immediate actions bound unconstitutionality. purpose too plain circumvention, doubts entertained wisdom circumstances. Our cases recognized way depends whether brings question, whole 27 7, 526; see J.Moore, Practice 110.03(5), p. (2d ed. including threshold jurisdiction, American Friends Service Committee, 13, 16, required, (1960).12 follow act, III 16 Proper does require extended discussion. argue fact, always insubstantial. suffered vagueness, concerned two clauses making punishable 'all disorders neglects prejudice good discipline armed forces' conduct bring discredit forces.' article, accused committed offenses. Thus, possible vagueness parts affected DeChamplain. point, served whether, substantial. is, concedes,13 dismissed.14 17 turn, finally, portion court-martial. Since independent unrelated validity interpretation hear it. As claimed support prayed incarcerated system. intervention ensure receives free error, avoid possibility incarcerated, review, inevitably invalid. sufficient warrant interference ruling presumably relitigation courts, resulting disruption circumvention system provided Congress. 758, 1313, 19 Reversed, 20 BRENNAN, whom DOUGLAS MARSHALL join, concurring judgment. I concur dismissal intervention,' makes try all. Therefore, tribunals. my dissenting 762, 1315, (1975). Chief Staff, Department Judge Advocate General following Richards-Gebaur Base, Missouri: Colonel Hewitt E. Lovelace, Jr., convening authority; Major Forrest W. Thomas, Staff Advocate; Russell A. Stanley, judge. Frantz, U.S.C.M.A. 161, C.M.R. 37 (1953). text provides: 'Though specifically mentioned chapter, forces, offense, punished discretion court.' 46 784 (1972). 22 150, 150 211, 211 (1973); 656, 1329 McLucas, 462, 47 552 observed Unrue, 654 declined Circuit stated '(i)t simply offends basic notions fairness plaintiff endure lengthy expect tribunal summarily rejected asserted.' 1295 (D.C.1973). Following decision, consultants selected materials Utica Mutual Insurance Co. Vincent, 375 129, 131 (CA2) (Friendly, J.), cert. denied, 389 88 63, 102 (1967). description argument, intimate approval radical expansion appears represent. There entirely issue. Appellee's vigorously position brief. oral receded agrees Tr. Oral Arg. 17. Nestor clear, conclude proper course judgment convened, 1370—1371. Brief 21. matter, decide established conclusively, apparently generally barring federal-court proceedings. Cf. Younger Harris, 401 37, 53 54, 746, 754—755, 669

Category: 1