Argued on November 5, 2019.
I. Whether the Army court erred by considering military confinement policies but refusing to consider specific evidence of Appellant’s confinement conditions.
II. Whether the Army court conducted a valid Article 66 review when it failed to consider Appellant’s constitutional claims.
III. Whether Appellant’s constitutional rights were violated by a confinement facility policy that barred him from all forms of communication with his minor children without an individualized assessment demonstrating that an absolute bar was necessary.
Note: Audio post-processed for this podcast with a dynamic normalizer filter.