Comment by Joseph H.L. Perez-Montes
The primary purpose of this Comment is to answer that question—and the answer proposed herein is “no.” In doing so, the Comment will trace the historical development of both the privatization trend in the American military and the political question doctrine as a legal premise. Next, it will provide a detailed survey of the jurisprudence emanating from PMC-related injuries, as well as the analytical underpinnings and conflicts of those decisions. Finally, this Comment suggests means of resolving these conflicts in the hopes of (1) clarifying any doctrinal misgivings in these decisions and (2) inspiring a solution that maintains judicial restraint while safeguarding the rights of victimized servicepersons, contractors, and their survivors.
About the Author
Joseph H.L. Perez-Montes. J.D. candidate 2009, Tulane University School of Law; B.A. 2004, Louisiana College.
Citation
83 Tul. L. Rev. 219 (2008)