Military justice practitioners (MJPs) must seek the swift execution of justice; they also require expert witnesses and consultants. This can lead to tension between speedy justice and ensuring enough time for experts to assist in the process.

The Confrontation Clause affords criminal defendants, including Service members, the right to confront witnesses whose statements are used against them at trial. Confrontation Clause analysis is the first step in determining admissibility of a non-present witness’s oral or written statements. The “principal evil” avoided through the Confrontation Clause is entry of inculpatory evidence without giving the accused adequate opportunity to test its veracity by examining the witness who asserted it.

This is a companion piece to the authors’ recent publication in the Military Law Review titled Transforming Military Justice: The 2022 and 2023 National Defense Authorization Acts.

On 10 April 2023, Colonel (Retired) Larry Morris delivered the Fiftieth Kenneth J. Hodson Lecture on Criminal Law. His remarks touched on challenges facing practitioners, some suggested approaches, and some recommendations and observations on the military justice system. What follows are excerpts from those remarks. The full lecture will be available in the Military Law Review, volume 231, issue 2.

On 9 June 2023, Lieutenant General Stuart W. Risch, The 41st Judge Advocate General, U.S. Army, delivered the following remarks to members of the staff and faculty, distinguished guests, and officers attending the graduation ceremony for the 66th Military Judges Course at The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School in Charlottesville, Virginia.