The Military Court of Appeals is completely separate from any appeals that go through civilian channels... The court only hears appeals from those subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice...
And congressional personnel serving in some reserve military capacity is quite common (Not too many lawyers get in combat, anyway)... I am not sure but I think Steve Chabot may still have some military obligation...
And you have to remember also, that all commissioned officers are subject to recall to military service for the rest of their lives (unless they really do something stupid)..
The Military Court of Appeals is in fact subordinate to the Federal Court of Appeals. It is not a stand alone system. Federal Circuit courts do have jurisdiction on appellate matters. I am not overly concerned, but I do believe the question should be asked if for no other reason than to protect Sen. Graham. I am fairly certain that at some point he will hear a case and join an opinion that is then appealed... and that process will cause the libDems to raise a firestorm of questions and accusations. I would rather ask and answer these questions on the front end than give the libDems ammunition to be used later. Questions of Ethics and Conflict of Interest should be raised up front, considered, and decided, thus preventing problems down the road.
I am also concerned that public statements made by the Senator and votes he cast may cause him to be ineligible to hear some cases.
For example: a detainee at Gitmo is brought to trial at a military tribunal. His case is appealed to the MCoA. Sen. Graham having cast a vote in favor of the Patriot Act, and having made public statements in support of the war may face conflict issues in being allowed to sit on that case. It may NOT be a problem, but then again it might .... I want 'our guys' to handle these kinds of things on the front end. Do the right thing, ask all the right questions from the start, and leave a public record so that future challenges are mitigated or diffused.