Ex Parte Hayes

Background

A United States Army private on active duty in Mannheim, Germany, says the Army failed to honor an enlistment commitment and that keeping him in service violated law and Army rules. His local commanding officer in Mannheim approved his discharge, but the Army’s Chief of Personnel Actions in Washington denied it. The private brought a habeas corpus application to a Justice of the Supreme Court because he worried that no U.S. district court could hear the case while he and his immediate commander were located overseas. The Solicitor General suggested the District Court for the District of Columbia could hear the case or that the application be transferred there.

Reasoning

The core question was where a service member can seek habeas review when the service member and the immediate custodian are abroad. Justice Douglas reviewed prior cases about where custody and chain of command matter for federal habeas petitions. He noted that some officials in the chain of command and the named respondents were located in Washington, D.C., unlike situations where no one in the chain of command lived in the district. Without deciding the merits of the soldier’s claim, the Justice transferred the application to the District Court for the District of Columbia and acknowledged that that court can decide whether it has authority to hear the case.

Real world impact

The transfer lets a D.C. federal court consider both whether it can hear the claim and, if so, whether the Army violated enlistment or discharge obligations. This action is procedural and does not resolve the private’s substantive claim; the District Court will determine jurisdiction and then address the merits if appropriate.