The U.S. Supreme Court building is seen in Washington on Feb. 5, 2020.

The U.S. Supreme Court building is seen in Washington on Feb. 5, 2020. (Carlos Bongioanni/Stars and Stripes)

A Supreme Court opinion this week banning non-unanimous verdicts in state criminal cases leaves the military as the sole American jurisdiction that allows them.

The court’s 6-3 decision on Ramos v. Louisiana said that a unanimous jury decision, long required in federal courts under Sixth Amendment guarantees on the rights to a trial by jury, also applied to state courts. Oregon was the last state allowing non-unanimous juries.

But there was no mention in the decision of military courts, which require only a three-quarters majority for a conviction.

“The issue is that in military courts there are no Sixth Amendment rights,” said Matt Osborn, a former Air Force lawyer now in private practice in the Washington, D.C., area.

The courts have repeatedly found that the Constitution gives Congress power to “make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces,” including a military justice system dedicated to good order and discipline. As such, some protections for civilian defendants don’t apply to service members, the courts have held.

“If there’s no right to a jury, there’s no right to a unanimous jury,” said Don Christensen, a former Air Force prosecutor.

Military defendants are not judged by juries of their peers but by courts-martial “panels” composed of higher-ranking troops selected by commanders.

Civilian felony trials require 12 jurors. Until last year, the size of courts-martial panels varied and a two-thirds majority was required to convict. Now, eight members compose a general court-martial panel, with six needed to convict.

Panel members discuss the case but vote only once, after the highest-ranking officer decides to do so.

“As with many procedures in the military, the goal is speed and efficiency,” said Michael Lyons, a former Air Force lawyer now practicing in the Washington, D.C., area. “Not requiring all members to agree as to guilt or innocence eliminates the deadlocked juries and mistrials that occur in civilian courts when the jury is not unanimous.”

Military lawyers disagreed whether the Supreme Court decision would lead to subsequent litigation that could force the military to require unanimous verdicts, or whether it was a matter only Congress could decide.

But some said the rules should change.

“There’s no longer a reason to deny service members the same protections as the civilians they defend,” Christensen said. “We don’t need King George’s justice system.” Twitter: @montgomerynance

author picture
Nancy is an Italy-based reporter for Stars and Stripes who writes about military health, legal and social issues. An upstate New York native who served three years in the U.S. Army before graduating from the University of Arizona, she previously worked at The Anchorage Daily News and The Seattle Times. Over her nearly 40-year journalism career she’s won several regional and national awards for her stories and was part of a newsroom-wide team at the Anchorage Daily News that was awarded the 1989 Pulitzer Prize for Public Service.

Sign Up for Daily Headlines

Sign up to receive a daily email of today's top military news stories from Stars and Stripes and top news outlets from around the world.

Sign Up Now