The Judge Advocate General is the highest legal and judicial authority within the Judge Advocate General's Corps. The office also exercises the Corps-wide supervisory and administrative authority assigned by law and reports to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
That does not make the Judge Advocate General the trial judge for every case. Most cases are handled first by a Military Judge and, when properly appealed, by the appropriate Assistant Judge Advocate General before final review by the Judge Advocate General is even possible.
A simple way to remember the judicial path is that the Military Judge handles the trial, the Assistant Judge Advocate General handles the ordinary service appeal, and the Judge Advocate General handles final discretionary review. The Judge Advocate General also establishes controlling precedent through published merits holdings when the governing requirements are satisfied.
Section 73 · The judge advocate general's administrative and judicial authority
The Judge Advocate General may possess broad administrative authority over the Corps, including supervision of legal operations, professional standards, certification, judicial administration, and other responsibilities assigned to the office. The Judge Advocate General also possesses supreme judicial authority, but that judicial authority is exercised through the procedures established by the Rules.
Administrative access and judicial jurisdiction are therefore different. The Judge Advocate General may be able to inspect a trial case for administrative reasons without that case being personally before the Judge Advocate General for judicial decision. Being able to see everything does not mean everything is currently on your desk.
Section 74 · How a case usually reaches the judge advocate general
A case ordinarily does not move directly from the Military Judge to the Judge Advocate General. The usual path is trial before a Military Judge, followed by ordinary appellate review before the appropriate Assistant Judge Advocate General.
After that ordinary appellate process has concluded, a party may ask the Judge Advocate General to accept the matter for final review. That request is made through a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari. The term sounds dramatic, but the basic meaning is simple: "Judge Advocate General, we are asking you to choose this case for final review."
Section 75 · Certiorari is discretionary
Certiorari is not an automatic additional appeal. A party may file a valid petition and still have review denied.
The Judge Advocate General decides whether the case should receive final merits review. A denial does not necessarily mean the lower court was unquestionably correct or that the petition was poorly written.
Think of the petition as getting the case to the front door. The Judge Advocate General decides whether to open the door.
Section 76 · Why the judge advocate general may accept a case
The Judge Advocate General may be particularly interested in cases involving important legal questions extending beyond one individual dispute. Examples may include conflicting appellate decisions, a decision inconsistent with controlling Judge Advocate General precedent, an important unresolved legal question, a substantial jurisdictional issue, a serious departure from ordinary judicial procedure, or a question affecting uniform military law across the services.
These considerations may support final review but do not force the Judge Advocate General to grant it. A strong petition should therefore explain not only why the lower court may have been wrong, but why the highest judicial authority of the Corps should spend time resolving this particular issue.
