Security clearances determine whether an individual is eligible for access to classified information. These clearances are used for jobs that contain secret and top secret information, including jobs in agencies like the Department of Defense or the Department of Homeland Security. The biggest concern when it comes to security clearances is determining whether an individual has unquestionable allegiance to the United States, as there is a lot of sensitive information at stake.
Smartphone apps are playing a role in many areas of society, even military and/or criminal law. In a recent example, a cell phone video may have played a role in the decision to charge a Navy civilian employee with three misdemeanor counts.
Like any entity, the military has an administrative component that involves paperwork, personnel and, quite often, a lot of waiting. Some of that administrative work may involve routine information and medical records. Other administrative activity may be more serious, such as adverse administrative actions or even administrative discharges.
A service member’s safety may sometimes be in the hands of his or her peers, especially during dangerous missions involving a team effort. That reality may necessitate a chain of command, where centralized leadership ensures a unit’s combat readiness and maneuverability. However, a recent article questions whether that approach should be modified for military justice issues.
Readers may be familiar with the concept of double jeopardy, which generally prohibits a criminal defendant from being tried for the same criminal offense twice. In the military justice system, a court-martial might be viewed as the equivalent of a criminal trial. Why, then, does a recent news article profile a marine who is facing a second court-martial?