Military Law

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
ArkansasFan
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 9:39 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby ArkansasFan » Fri Dec 04, 2009 8:05 pm

MrTexas wrote:I had a question about the physical they give you. How invasive is it? Are we talking borderline prostate exam? Do they do a hair test or a piss test for drugs?


lol

If you're worried about drugs you should forgo the military and law school.

User avatar
Patrick Bateman
Posts: 595
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:41 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby Patrick Bateman » Fri Dec 04, 2009 8:21 pm

MrTexas wrote:I had a question about the physical they give you. How invasive is it? Are we talking borderline prostate exam? Do they do a hair test or a piss test for drugs?


No prostate exam.

Piss and blood for drugs. You have to disclose all your drug use when you apply. Extensive drug use will likely result in you never being picked up. You will also get investigated for your security clearance, so if you attempt to conceal drug use it often will be discovered.

wesleybs
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 8:53 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby wesleybs » Fri Dec 04, 2009 8:24 pm

Anyone hear results from Air Force Jag 2L internships?

MrTexas
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 7:27 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby MrTexas » Fri Dec 04, 2009 9:49 pm

eodops wrote:Good luck to all of those applying for GLP this year!

I am in the GLP program, so I thought I'd throw in my two cents.

First, the most important thing is your SJA interview. Many SJAs have sat on previous selection boards, so they know exactly what to write in your package that will provide a thumbs up or down. Every time I spoke with or visited the legal office where I interviewed I treated it like an interview. Your SJA will likely have you meet at least some of the enlisted and officer staff in the legal office. If you treat all of them professionally I think it goes a long way.

Second, have a professional photograph taken in a professional pose (even if it is at Walmart). My SJA told me about packages she had seen with a photograph of a person in shorts and flip-flops. Don't be that guy/girl.

Also, it is possible to go to field training after your 1L year instead of your 2L year; incase you are worried about internships for 1L's as opposed to 2L's.

If anyone has any specific questions about getting in the program or what comes next feel free to ask me. Again, best of luck!


1) What were your stats like (grades/class rank/what rank school/ECs/etc) when you were selected?
2) Describe how your interview with the SJA went. What types of questions asked, etc.
3) Do you have any indication of how much easier it was to get in the GLP as opposed to direct appointment?

MrTexas
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 7:27 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby MrTexas » Fri Dec 04, 2009 10:11 pm

Patrick Bateman wrote:
MrTexas wrote:I had a question about the physical they give you. How invasive is it? Are we talking borderline prostate exam? Do they do a hair test or a piss test for drugs?


No prostate exam.

Piss and blood for drugs. You have to disclose all your drug use when you apply. Extensive drug use will likely result in you never being picked up. You will also get investigated for your security clearance, so if you attempt to conceal drug use it often will be discovered.


How exactly does a security clearance work? Don't they do an investigation before you even go before the board? If that's the case it seems like they would catch you the first time, before it even got to the security clearance, right?

I have no doubt I could pass a urine test, but I smoked a few times 2-3 years ago and I heard a hair test can detect that.

User avatar
Esquire
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 2:45 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby Esquire » Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:41 pm

wesleybs wrote:Anyone hear results from Air Force Jag 2L internships?

Still waiting. I imagine we should hear before Christmas.

User avatar
Patrick Bateman
Posts: 595
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:41 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby Patrick Bateman » Sun Dec 06, 2009 1:08 am

MrTexas wrote:
Patrick Bateman wrote:
MrTexas wrote:I had a question about the physical they give you. How invasive is it? Are we talking borderline prostate exam? Do they do a hair test or a piss test for drugs?


No prostate exam.

Piss and blood for drugs. You have to disclose all your drug use when you apply. Extensive drug use will likely result in you never being picked up. You will also get investigated for your security clearance, so if you attempt to conceal drug use it often will be discovered.


How exactly does a security clearance work? Don't they do an investigation before you even go before the board? If that's the case it seems like they would catch you the first time, before it even got to the security clearance, right?

I have no doubt I could pass a urine test, but I smoked a few times 2-3 years ago and I heard a hair test can detect that.


With the volume of applicants, it would be impossible to investigate everyone before their board. You submit your SF-86 after you are accepted but before you go to Officer Training School.

If you smoked recently, and 2-3 years is recent, and admit it on your application, I really do not see you being selected. If you conceal it and it is discovered during your background investigation, you could be looking at anything from jail time to losing your law license.

ArkansasFan
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 9:39 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby ArkansasFan » Sun Dec 06, 2009 1:42 am

Patrick Bateman wrote:
MrTexas wrote:
Patrick Bateman wrote:
MrTexas wrote:I had a question about the physical they give you. How invasive is it? Are we talking borderline prostate exam? Do they do a hair test or a piss test for drugs?


No prostate exam.

Piss and blood for drugs. You have to disclose all your drug use when you apply. Extensive drug use will likely result in you never being picked up. You will also get investigated for your security clearance, so if you attempt to conceal drug use it often will be discovered.


How exactly does a security clearance work? Don't they do an investigation before you even go before the board? If that's the case it seems like they would catch you the first time, before it even got to the security clearance, right?

I have no doubt I could pass a urine test, but I smoked a few times 2-3 years ago and I heard a hair test can detect that.


With the volume of applicants, it would be impossible to investigate everyone before their board. You submit your SF-86 after you are accepted but before you go to Officer Training School.

If you smoked recently, and 2-3 years is recent, and admit it on your application, I really do not see you being selected. If you conceal it and it is discovered during your background investigation, you could be looking at anything from jail time to losing your law license.


For some time now I've also wondered what the process for a security clearance investigation entailed. I'm guessing it would be similar to that of a law enforcement applicant. We look at a person's driving, criminal, financial, educational, and social (who you know, who you're related to, where you've lived) background. Then of course there's a later medical and psychological, but that's another matter. I'd wager the financial, social, and criminal background would be the elements of a security clearance.

I found a job ad once for a contractor in this area to do background investigations for security clearances for various federal agencies.

goreman
Posts: 31
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:17 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby goreman » Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:02 am

It's been my experience that most people who have used drugs before, especially stuff like smoking pot (as opposed to a heroin user or something), typically get their security clearances with no major issues. The key is you MUST be completely forthright and honest about the issue. If it comes up somewhere else and you didn't admit it, you could be in for some problems in the background investigation. Seriously, though, I work in intel and there are all kinds of people who I work with that have up to Top Secret/SCI clearances with a wide variety of previous drug infractions. Just be open about it and with it being a few years ago, you might be okay. It COULD be an issue, but I wouldn't necessarily freak out about it.

Now, as far as entrance to the bar and all that, I couldn't say. That's another matter entirely and I'm not really qualified to comment on that.

User avatar
Patrick Bateman
Posts: 595
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:41 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby Patrick Bateman » Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:24 am

goreman wrote:It's been my experience that most people who have used drugs before, especially stuff like smoking pot (as opposed to a heroin user or something), typically get their security clearances with no major issues. The key is you MUST be completely forthright and honest about the issue. If it comes up somewhere else and you didn't admit it, you could be in for some problems in the background investigation. Seriously, though, I work in intel and there are all kinds of people who I work with that have up to Top Secret/SCI clearances with a wide variety of previous drug infractions. Just be open about it and with it being a few years ago, you might be okay. It COULD be an issue, but I wouldn't necessarily freak out about it.

Now, as far as entrance to the bar and all that, I couldn't say. That's another matter entirely and I'm not really qualified to comment on that.


Agreed. I was not trying to say the poster would not get his/her clearance. Their odds of being selected for JAG however...

motownsaint
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 1:38 am

Re: Military Law

Postby motownsaint » Sun Dec 06, 2009 8:54 pm

Do you folks know of many JAGs with spouses or long-term significant others?

I'm really enchanted with the idea of JAG right now, and I certainly wouldn't mind moving every couple of years to a new place. But I don't want to reduce my SO's career options to house wife, either. What have you guys seen work/experienced?

User avatar
patrickd139
Posts: 2883
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:53 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby patrickd139 » Mon Dec 07, 2009 10:39 am

motownsaint wrote:Do you folks know of many JAGs with spouses or long-term significant others?

I'm really enchanted with the idea of JAG right now, and I certainly wouldn't mind moving every couple of years to a new place. But I don't want to reduce my SO's career options to house wife, either. What have you guys seen work/experienced?


Also interested in this information.

BHL
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 11:36 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby BHL » Tue Dec 08, 2009 10:04 pm

motownsaint wrote:Do you folks know of many JAGs with spouses or long-term significant others?

I'm really enchanted with the idea of JAG right now (I go AD next month), and I certainly wouldn't mind moving every couple of years to a new place. But I don't want to reduce my SO's career options to house wife, either. What have you guys seen work/experienced?

I'm dealing with that reality now. The AF offered me a great overseas base, and I decided to take it. My then gf had to do a gut check to determine if the military life was something she wanted. Thankfully, she knew enough wives of officers to provide a picture for her. The short story of what they said is that being an officer's wife is what you make of it. If your SO doesn't want to be more than a housewife, then she won't try to be. BUT if she wants more, she can have it to an extent. The main caveat is that your SO (and future wife) will never get the opportunity to hold an upper level position unless it's on base. Few employers (and likely no employer) wants someone running their business who is going to leave in a few years. Some careers (artist, writer, nurse, etc.) are more mobile than others, so it somewhat depends on the situation. Regardless, you SO will need ot make sacrifices for it to work. Your main sacrifice will be down the road in determining whether you decide to stay beyond the initial commitment, but I don't think that's something you should predetermine from the start unless your SO has something waiting in the wings.

Furthermore, I think the housewife/baby-making-momma thing for military wives isn't as true when it comes to officers' wives than it does for enlistee wives. It happens, but I don't think to the same extent. I suspect education has a lot to do with the disparity: officers and their spouses tend to be more educated than enlistees and their wives. As such, the wives of officers want more than just being a mother because they feel like they went to college for a reason. This is at least the sentiment the few wives I know have, but that's fairly limited at this point.

User avatar
pamo
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 1:31 am

Re: Military Law

Postby pamo » Tue Dec 08, 2009 10:58 pm

BHL wrote:
motownsaint wrote:Do you folks know of many JAGs with spouses or long-term significant others?

I'm really enchanted with the idea of JAG right now (I go AD next month), and I certainly wouldn't mind moving every couple of years to a new place. But I don't want to reduce my SO's career options to house wife, either. What have you guys seen work/experienced?

I'm dealing with that reality now. The AF offered me a great overseas base, and I decided to take it. My then gf had to do a gut check to determine if the military life was something she wanted. Thankfully, she knew enough wives of officers to provide a picture for her. The short story of what they said is that being an officer's wife is what you make of it. If your SO doesn't want to be more than a housewife, then she won't try to be. BUT if she wants more, she can have it to an extent. The main caveat is that your SO (and future wife) will never get the opportunity to hold an upper level position unless it's on base. Few employers (and likely no employer) wants someone running their business who is going to leave in a few years. Some careers (artist, writer, nurse, etc.) are more mobile than others, so it somewhat depends on the situation. Regardless, you SO will need ot make sacrifices for it to work. Your main sacrifice will be down the road in determining whether you decide to stay beyond the initial commitment, but I don't think that's something you should predetermine from the start unless your SO has something waiting in the wings.

Furthermore, I think the housewife/baby-making-momma thing for military wives isn't as true when it comes to officers' wives than it does for enlistee wives. It happens, but I don't think to the same extent. I suspect education has a lot to do with the disparity: officers and their spouses tend to be more educated than enlistees and their wives. As such, the wives of officers want more than just being a mother because they feel like they went to college for a reason. This is at least the sentiment the few wives I know have, but that's fairly limited at this point.


BHL, thanks for the great answer. If you could, would you elaborate a bit on the part where you said "The main caveat is that your SO (and future wife) will never get the opportunity to hold an upper level position unless it's on base."

My SO has had a long held interest in service with the military, but is currently just prepping for next year's LSAT. If the AF/Navy makes efforts to keep spouses on the same bases, that would also definitely be something worth knowing.

More generally, are there career options on base that are there for military wives?

BHL
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 11:36 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby BHL » Wed Dec 09, 2009 10:59 am

pamo wrote:
BHL wrote:
motownsaint wrote:Do you folks know of many JAGs with spouses or long-term significant others?

I'm really enchanted with the idea of JAG right now (I go AD next month), and I certainly wouldn't mind moving every couple of years to a new place. But I don't want to reduce my SO's career options to house wife, either. What have you guys seen work/experienced?

I'm dealing with that reality now. The AF offered me a great overseas base, and I decided to take it. My then gf had to do a gut check to determine if the military life was something she wanted. Thankfully, she knew enough wives of officers to provide a picture for her. The short story of what they said is that being an officer's wife is what you make of it. If your SO doesn't want to be more than a housewife, then she won't try to be. BUT if she wants more, she can have it to an extent. The main caveat is that your SO (and future wife) will never get the opportunity to hold an upper level position unless it's on base. Few employers (and likely no employer) wants someone running their business who is going to leave in a few years. Some careers (artist, writer, nurse, etc.) are more mobile than others, so it somewhat depends on the situation. Regardless, you SO will need ot make sacrifices for it to work. Your main sacrifice will be down the road in determining whether you decide to stay beyond the initial commitment, but I don't think that's something you should predetermine from the start unless your SO has something waiting in the wings.

Furthermore, I think the housewife/baby-making-momma thing for military wives isn't as true when it comes to officers' wives than it does for enlistee wives. It happens, but I don't think to the same extent. I suspect education has a lot to do with the disparity: officers and their spouses tend to be more educated than enlistees and their wives. As such, the wives of officers want more than just being a mother because they feel like they went to college for a reason. This is at least the sentiment the few wives I know have, but that's fairly limited at this point.


BHL, thanks for the great answer. If you could, would you elaborate a bit on the part where you said "The main caveat is that your SO (and future wife) will never get the opportunity to hold an upper level position unless it's on base."

My SO has had a long held interest in service with the military, but is currently just prepping for next year's LSAT. If the AF/Navy makes efforts to keep spouses on the same bases, that would also definitely be something worth knowing.

More generally, are there career options on base that are there for military wives?

Any elaboration on this point takes my comment into a vague area. Of the wives I know, only one worked on base and that was as a nurse. She was in a different branch and didn't make a career out of it. She's now a successful artist.

I pressed a few people about the opportunities for wives and most said that on-base employment was probably their best bet. I think (don't take my word on it) wives get preferential treatment in the hiring at bases, so that should help them find higher level jobs there than off base. I suggest taking a look at the civilian jobs listed on USAJobs to give you an idea of what's out there. Eg, at the base to which I'm heading, the listed jobs are IT Specialist, various doctor positions, nurse, program coordinator and manager positions, historian, and secretary.

Again, I'm going out on a limb to some degree here since I'm trying to connect the dots on things other people told me rather than relaying the basic message.

MrTexas
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 7:27 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby MrTexas » Thu Dec 10, 2009 5:51 pm

Patrick Bateman wrote:
goreman wrote:It's been my experience that most people who have used drugs before, especially stuff like smoking pot (as opposed to a heroin user or something), typically get their security clearances with no major issues. The key is you MUST be completely forthright and honest about the issue. If it comes up somewhere else and you didn't admit it, you could be in for some problems in the background investigation. Seriously, though, I work in intel and there are all kinds of people who I work with that have up to Top Secret/SCI clearances with a wide variety of previous drug infractions. Just be open about it and with it being a few years ago, you might be okay. It COULD be an issue, but I wouldn't necessarily freak out about it.

Now, as far as entrance to the bar and all that, I couldn't say. That's another matter entirely and I'm not really qualified to comment on that.


Agreed. I was not trying to say the poster would not get his/her clearance. Their odds of being selected for JAG however...


I'm just wondering... is this mere speculation on your part, or do you have reason to believe this based on what SJAs and selection board members have said to you (as far as "recent" drug use basically disqualifying you from being selected. Although it seems absurd that use 2-3 years ago is considered "recent").

User avatar
Patrick Bateman
Posts: 595
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:41 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby Patrick Bateman » Fri Dec 11, 2009 1:58 am

MrTexas wrote:
Patrick Bateman wrote:
goreman wrote:It's been my experience that most people who have used drugs before, especially stuff like smoking pot (as opposed to a heroin user or something), typically get their security clearances with no major issues. The key is you MUST be completely forthright and honest about the issue. If it comes up somewhere else and you didn't admit it, you could be in for some problems in the background investigation. Seriously, though, I work in intel and there are all kinds of people who I work with that have up to Top Secret/SCI clearances with a wide variety of previous drug infractions. Just be open about it and with it being a few years ago, you might be okay. It COULD be an issue, but I wouldn't necessarily freak out about it.

Now, as far as entrance to the bar and all that, I couldn't say. That's another matter entirely and I'm not really qualified to comment on that.


Agreed. I was not trying to say the poster would not get his/her clearance. Their odds of being selected for JAG however...


I'm just wondering... is this mere speculation on your part, or do you have reason to believe this based on what SJAs and selection board members have said to you (as far as "recent" drug use basically disqualifying you from being selected. Although it seems absurd that use 2-3 years ago is considered "recent").


Based on offline SJA/Selection Board Member comments.

Smoked pot a few times in high school? Yeah, we all make mistakes. Smoking pot in law school when one really does appreciate that it is illegal? That's a problem for someone who is hoping to enforce laws, esp with the volume of drug offenses we prosecute. Harder drugs raise those issues even more so to say nothing of the security clearance implications.

Keep in mind the FBI absolutely bars applicants who have smoked pot more than 15 times. I think we are being pretty reasonable.

MrTexas
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 7:27 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby MrTexas » Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:45 am

Patrick Bateman wrote:
MrTexas wrote:
Patrick Bateman wrote:
goreman wrote:It's been my experience that most people who have used drugs before, especially stuff like smoking pot (as opposed to a heroin user or something), typically get their security clearances with no major issues. The key is you MUST be completely forthright and honest about the issue. If it comes up somewhere else and you didn't admit it, you could be in for some problems in the background investigation. Seriously, though, I work in intel and there are all kinds of people who I work with that have up to Top Secret/SCI clearances with a wide variety of previous drug infractions. Just be open about it and with it being a few years ago, you might be okay. It COULD be an issue, but I wouldn't necessarily freak out about it.

Now, as far as entrance to the bar and all that, I couldn't say. That's another matter entirely and I'm not really qualified to comment on that.


Agreed. I was not trying to say the poster would not get his/her clearance. Their odds of being selected for JAG however...


I'm just wondering... is this mere speculation on your part, or do you have reason to believe this based on what SJAs and selection board members have said to you (as far as "recent" drug use basically disqualifying you from being selected. Although it seems absurd that use 2-3 years ago is considered "recent").


Based on offline SJA/Selection Board Member comments.

Smoked pot a few times in high school? Yeah, we all make mistakes. Smoking pot in law school when one really does appreciate that it is illegal? That's a problem for someone who is hoping to enforce laws, esp with the volume of drug offenses we prosecute. Harder drugs raise those issues even more so to say nothing of the security clearance implications.

Keep in mind the FBI absolutely bars applicants who have smoked pot more than 15 times. I think we are being pretty reasonable.


Can you elaborate a little bit on these "offline" comments?

It just doesn't seem fair that a person who smoked 10 times in high school/early college gets more of a pass than somebody who has smoked twice in their entire life two years ago and has since vowed to never touch it again, or somebody who experimented ONE time, but as a 1L. You said yourself we all make mistakes.

brownshoe
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:46 am

Re: Military Law

Postby brownshoe » Fri Dec 11, 2009 9:50 am

MrTexas wrote:Can you elaborate a little bit on these "offline" comments?

It just doesn't seem fair that a person who smoked 10 times in high school/early college gets more of a pass than somebody who has smoked twice in their entire life two years ago and has since vowed to never touch it again, or somebody who experimented ONE time, but as a 1L. You said yourself we all make mistakes.


23-25 year olds are expected to make better judgments than 17-19 year olds. Officers are expected to make better judgments than most 23-25 year olds. "Fair" is not really something that matters. They are looking for the best people they can get and have WAY too many qualified applicants.

AfroNINJA1226
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 11:41 am

Re: Military Law

Postby AfroNINJA1226 » Fri Dec 11, 2009 10:30 am

This is an interesting thread...I'm active duty enlisted AF, right now. I am looking to Palace Chase and attend law school if I get accepted next cycle...I've done some volunteer work, with our Base Legal office...built some relationships with some of the JAGs...I think it is a good gig for anyone who wants it. I don't know how the JAG compares to a civilian firm, I would like to see...

User avatar
Patrick Bateman
Posts: 595
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:41 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby Patrick Bateman » Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:05 pm

Can you elaborate a little bit on these "offline" comments?

It just doesn't seem fair that a person who smoked 10 times in high school/early college gets more of a pass than somebody who has smoked twice in their entire life two years ago and has since vowed to never touch it again, or somebody who experimented ONE time, but as a 1L. You said yourself we all make mistakes.


I'm not going to debate the merit of this unofficial policy, esp as a company grade officer with absoultely zero influence over that policy. It is still a case by case decision; there is no categorical "smoke once in law school and your done" rule.

Brownshoe hits the nail on the head. Even if the policy is unfair, so what? Commissioned officers are individuals with the legal authority to lead others and are held to a far higher standard. The FBI will tell you the same thing if you ask about their 15 times and done policy - their Agents are the best and are held to the highest possible standards.

There are plenty of other lawyering jobs out there that do not care about drug use.

eodops
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 9:04 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby eodops » Fri Dec 11, 2009 1:23 pm

1) What were your stats like (grades/class rank/what rank school/ECs/etc) when you were selected?
2) Describe how your interview with the SJA went. What types of questions asked, etc.
3) Do you have any indication of how much easier it was to get in the GLP as opposed to direct appointment?[/quote]

I know this thread has moved on to drugs and what not, but I just finished my finals so now I have a few minutes....

1) My Fall 1L grades were not great. I think I had a 2.76, which put me around 50%. My school is ranked 77. I had a 3.5 undergrad and a 166 LSAT. I had some pretty good soft factors: ten years of prior service, five solid recommendation letters, etc.
2) For my SJA interview, I had a dependent ID card, so I stayed on base the night before. I showed up at the legal office bout 10 minutes early. The first half of the interview was with a Captain. I went to his office and we just chatted for about 45 minutes. Then I waited for the SJA to be free. I waited for about 45 minutes because she was extremely busy. My interview with the SJA was only about 20 minutes. She asked questions that you would expect: "Why do you want to be in the Air Force?" "Why do you want to be a JAG?" "Why should the board pick you, over another applicant?" About half of the interview was her and I just talking and / or her telling me about the JAG Corps.
3) As far as I know, the Air Force does not release GLP stats. I figure that there are way less GLP applicants though. Most people do not want to add ROTC to their last two years of law school, and most 1Ls are not thinking about getting a job yet (especially in their fall term).

I don't know if any of that is helpful. If you have any other questions feel free to let me know.

Baylan
Posts: 356
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 4:26 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby Baylan » Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:55 pm

I know this has been discussed ad nauseum, and over the past few months/weeks I've read through this entire thread, so for the sake of everyone (and myself), can I get a quick explanation of the DA, GLP, and the last (is there another?) way to secure an appointment to the JAG Corps? There are bits and pieces spread across the entire thread.

DA numbers, I know, are typically quite low (5-10% is the number often cited), and there are apparently no known GLP numbers, but is GLP appointment successful at a (significantly?) higher rate? I know this last bit of information will be purely anecdotal... but any information is better than nothing!

Thanks

User avatar
patrickd139
Posts: 2883
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:53 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby patrickd139 » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:46 pm

Baylan wrote:I know this has been discussed ad nauseum, and over the past few months/weeks I've read through this entire thread, so for the sake of everyone (and myself), can I get a quick explanation of the DA, GLP, and the last (is there another?) way to secure an appointment to the JAG Corps? There are bits and pieces spread across the entire thread.

DA numbers, I know, are typically quite low (5-10% is the number often cited), and there are apparently no known GLP numbers, but is GLP appointment successful at a (significantly?) higher rate? I know this last bit of information will be purely anecdotal... but any information is better than nothing!

Thanks


First, your answer varies from branch to branch. AF has three ways for law students to accept a commission. Marine Corps has a couple. Army and Navy, I'm not sure about, but I get the feeling you can only get a direct appointment.

Either way, google "JAG" and look at the websites for each branch. It will give you a great overview of each program and save us the time of retyping the information on this site. Plus, checkout these websites for more information about the commissioning process in general...

Air Force: http://www.airforceots.com/portal/index.php

Army: http://www.armyocs.com/

Marine Corps: http://www.marineocs.com/portal/index.php

Navy: http://www.usnavyocs.com/portal/index.php

and

Coast Guard: http://coastguardocs.org/portal/index.php

Edit: linkfail

clwilson6
Posts: 107
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:31 pm

Re: Military Law

Postby clwilson6 » Fri Dec 11, 2009 9:18 pm

joonbug wrote:I'm not a citizen yet. Do I have to be one to really consider military law as a viable option?


To be a military lawyer, you have to be commissioned and only US citizens can get a commission. Sorry.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.