Military Law Directory

New weapons do not reach the field before the lawyers do. For drones, cyber tools, and autonomous systems, a legal review is built into the development pipeline, and judge advocates and other authorized attorneys are the ones who conduct it. That review is how legal judgment shapes policy on emerging technology: not by debating it after deployment, but by gating it before development and again before fielding.

The foundational duty: reviewing new weapons

The obligation traces to Article 36 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, which requires a party to determine, when studying, developing, acquiring, or adopting a new weapon, means, or method of warfare, whether its use would be lawful. The United States implements weapons-legality review through its acquisition rules: DoD Directive 5000.01 requires that weapons acquisition be consistent with all applicable law, and attorneys authorized to conduct such reviews carry them out. The review must address consistency with domestic and international law, and the law of war in particular.

This is the mechanism by which a lawyer “shapes policy.” A weapon that cannot pass legal review does not proceed, which means the legal standard is designed into the technology rather than applied to it afterward.

The autonomous-weapons layer: DoD Directive 3000.09

For autonomy specifically, DoD Directive 3000.09, “Autonomy in Weapon Systems,” sets an additional process. First issued in 2012 and updated in January 2023, it governs the development and fielding of autonomous and semi-autonomous weapon systems and requires legal review and advice before formal development and again before fielding for certain systems.

A few specifics matter for accuracy:

• The directive defines a lethal autonomous weapon system as one that, once activated, can select and engage targets without further intervention by a human operator.
• Certain systems require senior-level approval, involving top policy, acquisition, and Joint Staff officials, before development and before fielding.
• The directive does not apply to cyberspace capabilities, unguided munitions, mines, or operator-guided munitions, so the autonomy rules and the cyber domain are handled on different tracks.

What the role looks like in practice

Suppose an autonomous targeting system is in development: the reviewing attorney assesses whether it can distinguish lawful targets and operate within accountability requirements, and that assessment determines whether the program proceeds as designed, proceeds with modifications, or stops.

The attorney conducting these reviews is not a policymaker in the political sense; the influence is exercised through the legal gate. By assessing whether an emerging system can comply with the law of war, distinguishing lawful targets, and operating within accountability requirements, the reviewer determines whether the program advances as designed, advances with modifications, or stops. As autonomy, cyber tools, and other capabilities evolve faster than treaties, that review function is where existing law gets translated onto technology the law never specifically anticipated, which is precisely why the legal review sits at the front of the pipeline rather than the end.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does the operator of a drone decide whether a strike is lawful?
No. Legality is built into the rules of engagement and prior legal review. Operators act within authorized rules rather than making the legal determination themselves in the moment.

Are fully autonomous weapons currently permitted?
U.S. policy subjects autonomous weapon systems to layered review and senior-level approval before development and fielding. The directive governs how such systems are developed rather than banning the category outright.

How does the law keep pace with fast-moving technology?
Through the weapons-review obligation, which requires assessing new means and methods of warfare as they are developed, applying existing legal standards to new tools.

This article is general information about legal review of emerging military technologies. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Policy and directives in this area are evolving and can change. This article describes the framework in general terms only.

Sources

• DoD Directive 3000.09, Autonomy in Weapon Systems
• Congressional Research Service, U.S. Policy on Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems
• DoD, Announcement of Update to DoD Directive 3000.09

Most “military pension” disputes are really divorce disputes wearing a financial mask. The core question is how a service member’s retired pay gets divided when a marriage ends, who pays whom, and whether the government will send the money directly. A legal assistance attorney working these cases spends less time arguing and more time applying one federal statute correctly, because the rules are precise and the mistakes are expensive.

The statute that controls: USFSPA

The governing law is the Uniformed Services Former Spouses’ Protection Act (USFSPA), found at 10 U.S.C. § 1408. A crucial point is what it does and does not do. The USFSPA does not create a federal right to any share of retired pay. Instead, it recognizes that state courts may treat disposable military retired pay as marital property and divide it under state law. So the division itself happens in state divorce court; the federal statute provides the enforcement mechanism.

This distinction matters in a dispute. Arguments about whether and how much to divide are state-law questions. Arguments about how the payment is made are federal.

The 10/10 rule and direct payment

The most misunderstood piece is the 10/10 rule. For the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) to pay a former spouse’s court-ordered share directly, at least 10 years of the marriage must have overlapped at least 10 years of the member’s creditable service.

The 10/10 rule is often misread as a rule about entitlement. It is not. A state court can still award a share of retired pay in a shorter marriage; the 10/10 threshold only determines whether DFAS will send that share directly. Below it, the retiree must pay the former spouse personally rather than through DFAS.

When direct payment applies, two limits cap it:

• No more than 50 percent of disposable retired pay is sent as a direct payment.
• If there are also garnishments for alimony or child support, that can rise to 65 percent.

Not the same as survivor benefits

A frequent source of confusion is mixing pension division with the Survivor Benefit Plan. They are different instruments: dividing retired pay splits the income a living retiree receives, while the Survivor Benefit Plan is an annuity paid to a survivor after the retiree dies. A court order can address both, but they are governed by different rules and deadlines, and an attorney handling a pension dispute checks whether survivor coverage is a separate open issue.

What the attorney actually does

In practice the work is exacting rather than dramatic:

• Reading the court order against the statute to confirm the division is enforceable and the payment language is correct.
• Applying the 10/10 test so the client knows whether DFAS will pay directly or the retiree must.
• Calculating disposable retired pay, which is the figure the percentages apply to, not gross pay.
• Flagging benefit eligibility, such as the separate 20/20/20 rule that can preserve a former spouse’s access to certain military benefits.

Suppose a couple was married nine years during service before divorcing: the attorney explains that, short of the ten-year overlap, a former spouse can still be awarded a share of the pension but will not receive it through direct payment from the finance center.

Because so much turns on the order’s exact wording and the dates of marriage and service, a member or former spouse should have the order reviewed before it is final, when language can still be fixed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does a former spouse’s remarriage end their share of divided retired pay?
Generally no. A division of retired pay as marital property under a court order is different from alimony and typically does not end simply because the former spouse remarries.

Is VA disability compensation divided the same way as retired pay?
No. VA disability compensation is generally not divisible as marital property, and a retiree’s waiver of retired pay to receive disability pay can reduce the amount available to divide, an issue that often requires careful drafting.

What happens to the former spouse’s payments when the retiree dies?
Direct payments of divided retired pay generally stop at the retiree’s death. Continued income for a former spouse usually depends on separate Survivor Benefit Plan coverage being in place.

This article is general information about military retired-pay division. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Outcomes depend on state law, the specific court order, and the facts of each case. Affected individuals should confirm current rules with DFAS and consult a legal assistance or qualified civilian attorney.

Sources

• 10 U.S.C. § 1408, Payment of retired pay in compliance with court orders (Legal Information Institute)
• Air Force Retiree Services, Uniformed Services Former Spouses’ Protection Act
• NC LAMP, Uniformed Services Former Spouses’ Protection Act (USFSPA)

The principles of the law of armed conflict are clear on paper; the hard part is applying them to a moving situation, under time pressure, before a decision is made rather than after. In practice, that is where a judge advocate lives, embedded in planning and operations so that legal judgment shapes the action while it can still be shaped. Understanding how the law is applied, not just what it says, is what separates doctrine from practice.

Built into the process, not bolted on

The defining feature of applying the law of armed conflict in practice is timing. Legal review is woven into the operational process rather than performed as an after-the-fact audit. Judge advocates advise during planning and, in many operations, are present where decisions are made, so that questions of lawfulness are answered before action is taken.

That placement reflects a hard reality: a decision made and executed cannot be unmade, so the value of legal advice is almost entirely front-loaded.

The targeting question, applied

The clearest example is targeting. Applying the law here means running the core principles against real facts:

• Distinction: Is the proposed objective a lawful military target, clearly distinguished from civilians and civilian objects?
• Proportionality: Is the expected incidental civilian harm not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated?
• Necessity: Is the action genuinely required for a legitimate military purpose?

These are not abstract checkboxes; they are judgments about specific people, places, and consequences, often made quickly. The advisor’s job is to apply the standards to the available facts and give the commander a clear read.

Advice, not command

A crucial line holds throughout. The judge advocate advises; the commander decides. Legal review informs the decision and flags the limits, but it does not displace command responsibility for the outcome. That division keeps legal judgment in the room without removing accountability from the chain of command.

After the action

Application does not end when the operation does. Judge advocates also support after-action assessment, helping evaluate whether conduct stayed within the law and capturing lessons that sharpen the next decision. Over time, that feedback loop is part of how a force keeps its practice aligned with the law.

Consider a targeting decision made under time pressure: the embedded attorney applies distinction and proportionality to the live facts in advance, so the legal review is built in rather than done after the fact.

The practical upshot is that applying the law of armed conflict is an operational discipline, not a library exercise. The principles supply the standard; the practice is putting a trained legal advisor where and when the decision happens, so that distinction, proportionality, and necessity are applied to live facts in time to matter.

Frequently Asked Questions

Where does a judge advocate actually apply the law of armed conflict?
In planning and operations, including targeting decisions, where legal review is built into the process rather than added after the fact.

Does the lawyer or the commander make the final decision?
The commander decides, and the judge advocate advises. Legal review informs the decision but does not replace command responsibility for it.

How can the law be applied under intense time pressure?
The principles of distinction, proportionality, and necessity are applied to the facts available at the moment, which is exactly why legal advisors are embedded in the process ahead of time.

This article is general information about the operational application of the law of armed conflict. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Operational legal questions are highly fact-specific. This article describes the practice in general terms only.

Sources

• TJAGLCS, Operational Law Handbook (2024).pdf)
• <a href="https://casebook.icrc.org/atoz/glossary/fundamental-principles-ihl”>ICRC, Fundamental Principles of IHL
• U.S. Marine Corps, Law of War and Rules of Engagement

Changing an existing custody order is harder than getting the first one, by design. Courts do not reopen custody whenever a parent is unhappy; a parent has to clear a threshold first. A military attorney helps a service member understand that threshold, judge whether their situation meets it, and identify the right court, before anyone files a motion that may not succeed.

The threshold: a substantial change in circumstances

The core rule is consistent across states: to modify a custody order, a parent must show a substantial (or material) change in circumstances since the last order, one that has, or could have, a significant effect on the child’s well-being, and that the requested change is in the child’s best interest. Both parts are required. A change that is trivial, or one that does not actually serve the child, will not support a modification.

This two-part test is the gate. Much of the early legal work is honestly assessing whether a parent’s situation clears it, because filing without a genuine change in circumstances usually fails.

The jurisdiction question: which court can modify

Modification also raises a where question, and the answer is often not the parent’s current state. Under the UCCJEA, the state that issued the original order generally retains exclusive continuing jurisdiction to modify it, and keeps that jurisdiction until defined conditions change, such as no parent or the child continuing to live there. For a military family that has since moved, this can mean the modification belongs to a state they no longer live in, a detail that catches people off guard and that an attorney flags early.

The military angle

Service can itself be the changed circumstance. A deployment or a permanent change of station can qualify as a substantial change, and deployment-custody statutes and the SCRA shape how those situations are handled. But, consistent with the broader rules, courts weigh military service within the best-interest standard rather than treating it as an automatic trigger or an automatic strike against a parent.

Where the attorney fits

A legal assistance attorney helps a member evaluate whether a real change in circumstances exists, understand the best-interest framework, and identify which state has jurisdiction under the UCCJEA, then prepares the member for a process that, when contested, is handled by civilian family-law counsel.

Suppose a parent seeks to change a custody order: a court generally requires both a substantial change in circumstances and that the change serve the child’s best interest, with the original state usually keeping jurisdiction.

The practical upshot is that modifying custody is a gated, jurisdiction-specific process, not a simple request. Clearing the changed-circumstances and best-interest threshold, in the right court, is what makes a modification possible, and getting honest advice on those points first is what keeps a member from a filing destined to fail.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does it take to modify a custody order?
Generally a substantial change in circumstances since the last order that affects the child, plus a showing that the requested change serves the child’s best interest.

Which court can modify the existing order?
Usually the state that issued the original order, which under the UCCJEA keeps exclusive continuing jurisdiction until defined conditions change.

Can a deployment or move justify modifying custody?
It can be a relevant changed circumstance, but courts weigh it within the best-interest standard rather than treating it as automatic.

This article is general information about modifying custody orders. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Custody law is set by each state and varies, and the rules can change. Service members should consult their legal assistance office and a family-law attorney about their situation.

Sources

• Office of Justice Programs, The Uniform Child-Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act
• Military OneSource, Military Child Custody Considerations
• National Conference of State Legislatures, Military Parent Custody and Visitation

Probate trips families up because it is a court process, not a piece of paper. A will does not move property by itself; a court has to oversee the transfer, and someone has to do the legwork of gathering assets, paying debts, and distributing what remains. A legal assistance attorney’s role is to demystify that process and prepare the documents that feed it, while being honest about where court administration calls for private counsel.

What probate actually is

Probate is the legal process by which a court oversees the transfer of a deceased person’s property to the people named in a will (devisees) or, if there is no will, to the heirs the law designates. The key word is “court.” Even with a valid will, the estate generally passes through a court-supervised process before title actually changes hands.

That framing corrects a common misunderstanding. People often assume a signed will is the end of the story; in reality it is the instruction sheet for a process that still has to run.

The personal representative and the paperwork that empowers them

At the center of probate is the personal representative, the executor named in a will or an administrator appointed by the court when there is none. The court formally appoints this person and issues a document, letters testamentary (or letters of administration), that grants the authority to deal with the estate’s property and accounts.

The personal representative’s duties are concrete:

• Inventory the assets and file that inventory with the court, bank and brokerage accounts, real estate, debts owed to the decedent.
• Pay the estate’s debts and expenses, such as funeral costs, medical bills, and outstanding accounts.
• Distribute what remains according to the will, or by statute if there is no will.

Throughout, the representative is legally obligated to act in the estate’s interest and follow the will’s directions, a fiduciary role, not a free hand.

Where legal assistance helps, and where it refers

A legal assistance office is well suited to the front end and the explanation: helping a client understand the probate process, preparing the will and estate-planning documents that shape it, and orienting an executor to their duties. For the actual administration, especially a complex or contested estate, the realistic path often includes hiring a private attorney to handle the court process and an accountant for taxes. Other organizations, including the Defense Finance and Accounting Service and the Department of Veterans Affairs, factor in when military and veteran benefits are part of the estate picture.

When a member’s parent dies leaving a will, the attorney can explain how the named personal representative obtains letters testamentary, inventories the estate, and distributes it, then refer the court filing to civilian counsel.

The honest summary is that probate is a guided court procedure with defined roles and required filings, and a legal assistance office is an excellent first stop to understand it and to get the foundational documents right, then a clear signpost to specialized help when the administration itself gets heavy. A family that grasps the process before they are in it is far better prepared for the work it actually requires.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does every estate have to go through probate?
Not always. Assets with beneficiary designations or held jointly may pass outside probate, while other property goes through the court-supervised process.

How long does probate take?
It varies widely by state and by the complexity of the estate, ranging from a few months to considerably longer for complicated or contested estates.

Can an executor be paid for the work?
Many states allow reasonable compensation for a personal representative, set by law or the court, although some people serve without taking a fee.

This article is general information about the probate process. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Probate rules vary by state and can change. For estate administration, consult your legal assistance office and, where needed, a licensed attorney in the relevant state.

Sources

• Military OneSource, The Probate Process and Survivor Benefits
• Military OneSource, Estate Planning Information for the Military
• NC State Bar (LAMP), All About Probate