317 U.S. 1, 63 S. Ct. 1, 87 L. Ed. 3 (1942)
The petitioners were eight men born in Germany who had lived in the United States before returning to Germany between 1933 and 1941.1 After the declaration of war, they received training at a sabotage school near Berlin and then traveled to occupied France, where four boarded one German submarine and four boarded another.2
On or about June 13, 1942, the first group landed at Amagansett Beach on Long Island, New York, during darkness while wearing German Marine Infantry uniforms or parts of uniforms.3 They immediately buried the uniforms along with explosives, fuses, and incendiary devices and proceeded in civilian dress to New York City.4 On or about June 17, 1942, the second group landed at Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida, in similar fashion, burying their caps and equipment before traveling in civilian dress to Jacksonville and other points.5
All eight were arrested in New York or Chicago by FBI agents.6 They had been instructed by an officer of the German High Command to destroy war industries and facilities in the United States, had been paid by the German government during training, and possessed substantial sums of United States currency when captured.7
On July 2, 1942, the President issued an order appointing a Military Commission to try the petitioners for offenses against the law of war and the Articles of War.8 On the same day he issued a proclamation declaring that persons who entered the United States through coastal defenses in time of war to commit sabotage would be subject to the law of war and denied access to civil courts.9 On July 3, 1942, charges were preferred alleging violation of the law of war, violation of Articles 81 and 82 of the Articles of War, and conspiracy.10
The Commission convened on July 8, 1942, heard evidence, and on July 27 found all petitioners guilty and sentenced them to death.11 The President approved the findings and sentences on July 31 but commuted one to life imprisonment.12 The petitioners applied to the District Court for the District of Columbia for leave to file habeas corpus petitions, which were denied.13 They then sought the same relief in the Supreme Court, which granted certiorari before judgment from the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia and heard argument at a special term on July 29 and 30, 1942.14 The facts recited above were stipulated by counsel.15
Whether the President has authority under the Constitution and statutes to appoint a military commission to try the petitioners for offenses against the law of war?16
The Constitution confers on the President the power to wage war which Congress has declared, and Congress has authorized trial of offenses against the law of war before military commissions by the Articles of War, particularly Article 15.17
Yes. The President, as Commander in Chief, issued the Order of July 2, 1942, appointing the Military Commission to try the petitioners for offenses against the law of war and the Articles of War.18 The petitioners received training at a sabotage school near Berlin and landed from German submarines at Amagansett Beach and Ponte Vedra Beach carrying explosives for the purpose of destroying war industries.19 These facts made them subject to the jurisdiction authorized by Congress.20
The President has authority under the Constitution and statutes to appoint the military commission.21
Whether the petitioners are subject to trial by military commission for entering the United States in time of war without uniform and with intent to commit sabotage?22
The law of war distinguishes between lawful and unlawful belligerents, and unlawful belligerents who enter without uniform for the purpose of sabotage are subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals.23
Yes. The petitioners landed during darkness wearing German Marine Infantry uniforms or parts of uniforms.24 They immediately buried the uniforms and proceeded in civilian dress to commit hostile acts.25 These actions rendered them unlawful belligerents under the law of war.26 The first specification of Charge I plainly alleges violation of the law of war by secretly passing through military lines in civilian dress for the purpose of committing sabotage.27
The petitioners are subject to trial by military commission.28
Whether the Fifth and Sixth Amendments require that the petitioners be tried by jury in civil courts rather than by military commission?29
The Fifth and Sixth Amendments do not enlarge the right to jury trial to offenses against the law of war that were not triable by jury at common law and that military commissions have historically tried.30
No. The petitioners were charged with an offense against the law of war not required to be tried by jury at common law.31 The Amendments were not intended to bring within their sweep cases triable by military commission.32 The Commission had jurisdiction because the offense was complete when the petitioners entered or remained upon United States territory in time of war without uniform and with hostile purpose.33
The Fifth and Sixth Amendments do not require trial by jury in civil courts.34
Whether the citizenship status of petitioner Haupt removes him from the jurisdiction of the military commission?35
Citizenship in the United States does not relieve an enemy belligerent from the consequences of unlawful belligerency in violation of the law of war.36
No. Petitioner Haupt, though claiming United States citizenship by naturalization of his parents, associated himself with the military forces of the German Reich and entered the country bent on hostile acts.37 This conduct made him an enemy belligerent subject to trial by military commission.38 The gravamen of the offense is unlawful belligerency, which applies equally to citizens.39
The citizenship status of petitioner Haupt does not remove him from the jurisdiction of the military commission.40
Whether the procedure ordered by the President for the military commission conflicts with the Articles of War so as to render the petitioners' detention unlawful?41
The Articles of War do not foreclose the procedure prescribed by the President for trial of offenses against the law of war by a military commission appointed by the President.42
The procedure ordered by the President does not conflict with the Articles of War.46