Replies

This is completely different, as it appears that this is in a involuntary deployment order. The soldier can't refuse involuntary deployment orders, so there's no de facto request that the Army can acquiesce to. In short, they're painted into a corner with court-martial as the only way out, assuming the Capt actually doesn't report for duty.

Reserve personnel are reserve until they are activated (active duty) which Major Cook was being put on active duty. I've been a volunteer for certain assignment before, and if I received orders to go where I wanted to go, it then becomes "orders" as in involuntary.

Like I said you dance on pinheads.

"Reserve personnel are reserve until they are activated (active duty) which Major Cook was being put on active duty."

There's absolutely no dancing going on here, at least on my part. I'm just telling you what the differences are.

Cook volunteered, he filed suit requesting a TRO to stop his deployment, which the Army took to as a request withdraw his submission to volunteer. His orders were revoked before (the day before I believe), he was to report.

From the suit that this Captain filed, it appears that this is an involuntary mobilization. Of course, given the limited information contained in Orly's filing, I suppose that it's possible this Captain volunteered as well, but I think - given her rank and facts outlined in her request for TRO - that is HIGHLY unlikely.

I don't know how much better I can explain the wide divide in circumstances and relevant facts between the two cases, and what those differences mean as a practical matter to the Army - it means it's virtually impossible for the Army to make this one go away like they did the last one.