Skip to content Skip to search

Republish This Story

* Please read before republishing *

We’re happy to make this story available to republish for free under an Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives Creative Commons license as long as you follow our republishing guidelines, which require that you credit The 19th and retain our pixel. See our full guidelines for more information.

To republish, simply copy the HTML at right, which includes our tracking pixel, all paragraph styles and hyperlinks, the author byline and credit to The 19th. Have questions? Please email [email protected].

— The Editors

Loading...

Modal Gallery

/
Sign up for our newsletter

Menu

  • Our Mission
  • Our Team
  • Latest Stories
  • Search
  • Upcoming Events
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
  • Donate
  • Work With Us
  • Fellowships
    • From the Collection

      Changing Child Care

      Illustration of a woman feeding a baby a bottle
      • Washington, D.C., offers financial relief to local child care workers

        Orion Rummler · September 20
      • As climate change worsens hurricane season in Louisiana, doulas are ensuring parents can safely feed their babies

        Jessica Kutz · May 5
      • Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito argued abortion isn’t an economic issue. But is that true?

        Chabeli Carrazana · May 4
    • From the Collection

      Next-Gen GOP

      Illustration of a woman riding an elephant
      • Mayra Flores’ victory set a record for women in Congress. It also reflects the growing visibility of Republican Latinas

        Candice Norwood · June 21
      • A banner year for Republican women

        Amanda Becker · November 11
      • Republican women could double representation in the U.S. House

        Amanda Becker · November 4
    • From the Collection

      On The Rise

      Illustration of three women marching
      • Can Cheri Beasley build a winning coalition in North Carolina?

        Candice Norwood · October 11
      • Los Angeles has never elected a woman mayor. Karen Bass hopes to change that.

        Nadra Nittle · September 8
      • Judge J. Michelle Childs is confirmed to D.C. appeals court

        Candice Norwood · July 20
    • From the Collection

      Pandemic Within a Pandemic

      Illustration of four people marching for Black Lives Matter with coronavirus as the backdrop
      • The 19th Explains: Why the nursing shortage isn’t going away anytime soon

        Mariel Padilla · September 23
      • Some LGBTQ+ people worry that the COVID-19 vaccine will affect HIV medication. It won’t.

        Orion Rummler · November 23
      • Why are more men dying from COVID? It’s a complicated story of nature vs. nurture, researchers say

        Mariel Padilla · September 22
    • From the Collection

      Portraits of a Pandemic

      Illustration of a woman wearing a mask and holding up the coronavirus
      • For family caregivers, COVID is a mental health crisis in the making

        Shefali Luthra · October 8
      • A new database tracks COVID-19’s effects on sex and gender

        Shefali Luthra · September 15
      • Pregnant in a pandemic: The 'perfect storm for a crisis'

        Shefali Luthra · August 25
    • From the Collection

      The 19th Explains

      People walking from many articles to one article where they can get the context they need on an issue.
      • The 19th Explains: What we know about Brittney Griner’s case and what it took to get her home

        Candice Norwood, Katherine Gilyard · December 8
      • The 19th Explains: Why the Respect for Marriage Act doesn’t codify same-sex marriage rights

        Kate Sosin · December 8
      • The 19th Explains: Why baby formula is still hard to find months after the shortage

        Mariel Padilla · December 1
    • From the Collection

      The Electability Myth

      Illustration of three women speaking at podiums
      • Mayra Flores’ victory set a record for women in Congress. It also reflects the growing visibility of Republican Latinas

        Candice Norwood · June 21
      • Stepping in after tragedy: How political wives became widow lawmakers

        Mariel Padilla · May 24
      • Do term limits help women candidates? New York could be a new testing ground

        Barbara Rodriguez · January 11
    • From the Collection

      The Impact of Aging

      A number of older people walking down a path of information.
      • From ballroom dancing to bloodshed, the older AAPI community grapples with gun control

        Nadra Nittle, Mariel Padilla · January 27
      • 'I'm planning on working until the day I die': Older women voters are worried about the future

        Mariel Padilla · June 3
      • Climate change is forcing care workers to act as first responders

        Jessica Kutz · May 31
    • From the Collection

      Voting Rights

      A series of hands reaching for ballots.
      • Election workers believe in our system — and want everyone else to, too

        Barbara Rodriguez, Jennifer Gerson · November 8
      • Voter ID laws stand between transgender people, women and the ballot box

        Barbara Rodriguez · October 14
      • Emily’s List expands focus on diverse candidates and voting rights ahead of midterm elections

        Errin Haines · August 30

    View all collections

  • Explore by Topic

    • 19th Polling
    • Abortion
    • Business & Economy
    • Caregiving
    • Coronavirus
    • Education
    • Election 2020
    • Election 2022
    • Environment & Climate
    • Health
    • Immigration
    • Inside The 19th
    • Justice
    • LGBTQ+
    • Politics
    • Press Release
    • Race
    • Sports
    • Technology

    View All Topics

Home
  • Our Mission
  • Our Team
  • Latest Stories
  • Search
  • Upcoming Events
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
  • Donate
  • Work With Us
  • Fellowships

We’re an independent, nonprofit newsroom reporting on gender, politics and policy. Read our story.

The 19th News(letter)

News from reporters who represent you and your communities.

You have been subscribed!

Submitting...

Uh-oh! Something went wrong. Please try again later.

Become a member

The 19th thanks our sponsors. Become one.

filed a complaint in a California district court against Gen. John Hyten and their former employer, the United States government, accusing Hyten of sexual battery and assault poses for a portrait.
Army Col. Kathryn Spletstoser filed a complaint in a California district court against Gen. John Hyten and the United States government, accusing Hyten of sexual battery and assault. (Carolyn Van Houten/The Washington Post/Getty Images)

Justice

The 19th Explains: How a recent court opinion could clear the way for military sexual assault survivors to find justice

A judge on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals challenged a decades-old ruling, allowing a colonel to take her sexual assault case to civil trial.

Mariel Padilla

General Assignment Reporter

Mariel Padilla portrait

Published

2022-08-24 05:00
5:00
August 24, 2022
am

Share

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Email

Sexual assault survivors in the military have long been unable to pursue civil charges against the U.S. government, but a ruling this month from a federal judge might signal a new way forward. 

In 2019, Kathryn Spletstoser, a former Army colonel, filed a complaint in a California district court against Gen. John Hyten and their former employer accusing Hyten of sexual battery and assault. Hyten, who went on to become the military’s second-highest ranking officer, and the U.S. government moved to dismiss the charges on the grounds of the Feres doctrine, which was established in 1950 and prevents service members from suing the government for injuries arising from activities “incident to military service” — a term that has come to include virtually every injury incurred while on active duty. Under the Feres doctrine, service members who alleged they were raped by superior officers, harmed by exposure to nuclear testing or were victims of medical malpractice have been unable to file suits. 

In an unprecedented move, the Central District Court of California in October 2020 denied the motion to dismiss because the “alleged sexual assault could not have conceivably serve any military purpose.” Hyten and the government then appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, where their motion to dismiss Spletsoser’s complaint was denied again earlier this month, on August 11. 

The 19th thanks our sponsors. Become one.

In her opinion, the 9th Circuit’s Judge Johnnie B. Rawlinson said: “We cannot fathom how the alleged sexual assault in this case could ever be considered an activity ‘incident to military service.’” Now, unless the case is appealed to the Supreme Court, Spletstoser can pursue a civil trial.  

Legal experts agree that the 9th Circuit’s “strong language” on this issue is significant because the case is likely to be appealed to the Supreme Court, which declined to review a petition challenging the Feres doctrine in 2019. The 19th reached out to several experts and victim advocates, most of whom submitted written information and expertise to the court  in the Spletstoser case, to weigh in on what this opinion means for military sexual assault survivors. 

Stories by experienced reporters you can trust and relate to.

Delivered directly to your inbox every weekday.

You have been subscribed!

Submitting…

Uh-oh! Something went wrong. Please try again later.

How significant is the 9th Circuit’s opinion for military sexual survivors right now?

Lindsey Knapp, a veteran, lawyer and the executive director of Combat Sexual Assault, a nonprofit dedicated to helping military sexual assault survivors, called the opinion a “huge win.” 

“We’re really excited about this and [survivors] should expect some larger, broader strategy coming out soon to help them specifically,” Knapp said. 

Knapp, who regularly takes up cases involving sexual assault in the military, said she’s always trying to find attorneys who can assist or do the same kind of work because for many, these types of cases are a losing battle. Her organization’s new strategy following the court’s ruling is to recruit and create a broader pool of attorneys who will be paired with clients and placed in appropriate firms across the country, especially outside of the 9th Circuit. If similar cases are appealed to other circuit courts around the country, the Supreme Court is even more likely to take notice. Ultimately, Knapp said she hopes more survivors will have the legal support they need to hold perpetrators and those in power accountable. 

“We don’t have a clear path to victory yet, but certainly the process has begun,” Knapp said. “And it’s looking very favorable. Spletstoser crawled so we could run.” 

Lory Manning, a retired Navy captain and director of government operations and relations at Service Women’s Action Network (SWAN), said she’s less optimistic about whether the ruling will become the law of the land. But, she said, it caught the attention of many who have been working on this issue for years and could have broader ripple effects.

“Sexual assault survivors and their attorneys are watching closely,” Manning said. “If people can sue with an exception to the Feres doctrine because it’s off-duty, not incident to service — this can have wider implications. And the courts and the Congress will be watching that as well.” 

Don Christensen, a retired Air Force colonel who served as the former chief prosecutor for the U.S. Air Force, said that the court opinion is “potentially massively significant.”

“The military has argued — in my mind, unbelievably — that rape and sexual assault are incident to service,” said Christensen, now president of Protect Our Defenders, an advocacy group dedicated to ending sexual violence in the military. “At least the 9th Circuit put out some pretty strong language that there’s no way that a rape or sexual assault can serve a military purpose. There’s nothing unique about rape and sexual assault that requires military expertise to abjudicate.”

Deshauna Barber, an Army veteran and chief executive of SWAN, said the ruling gave her hope. 

“I personally think it’s not a good look, not a good representation of the image that the military tries to push through when it comes to being noble and integrity-driven — when you have a colonel suing the government for the actions of a general during military service,” Barber said. “So in my mind, I’m not saying she’s obviously going to get the justice that she deserves, but I think at bare minimum, this is putting pressure on the military to make changes.” 

  • More from The 19th
  • What is ‘soft’ censorship? When school districts don’t ban books, they still limit student access
  • Family planning clinics, a safe space for transgender patients, face a new battle after Roe v. Wade
  • ‘It’s really crushing’: Trans students in higher education face misgendering, isolation and debt

Why has it been so difficult for military sexual assault survivors to take their cases to court? 

The military justice system is separate from that of civilians. Criminal offenses are handled and investigated internally by the military, and service members’ ability to seek civil trials has long been limited. 

Before World War II, the U.S. government operated with “sovereign immunity” and could not be sued. At the war’s end, Congress enacted the Federal Tort Claims Act to allow for federal employees to recover damages when their injury is the result of the government’s negligence or irresponsibility. However, the legislation includes a two-year statute of limitations for those seeking recourse and came with a major exception: service members could not sue over any injuries incurred in battle during wartime. The idea was that civilian courts in these cases would undermine military discipline. 

One Supreme Court ruling in particular, known as the Feres doctrine and established after the war’s end, limited service members’ rights further by barring service members from suing the government over any injuries incurred while on active duty. Rudolph Feres, a decorated World War II veteran who parachuted into France on D-Day, died in a barracks fire after returning to the United States. His widow sued the government, arguing that the government was negligent by housing her husband with a defective heating system and failing to maintain a fire watch. The Court ruled that the government was not liable for Feres’s death.  

Though typically applied to cases of medical malpractice, military missions and military-sponsored recreational activities — the Feres doctrine has, over the years, become more expansive to include different circumstances, including environmental contamination and sexual assault allegations. Women are the largest-growing demographic in the military and reports of sexual assault and retaliation in the military continue to rise. 

The Supreme Court has continued to debate the use of the Feres doctrine over the years, and several justices have voiced their disapproval of a doctrine that allows citizens a recourse not afforded to members of the military. 

“Feres was wrongly decided and heartily deserves the widespread, almost universal criticism it has received,” Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in 1987. 

In 2019, the Court refused to reconsider the doctrine. In that case, which also came out of the 9th Circuit, a man filed a suit against the government after his wife, a Navy lieutenant, died at a naval hospital due to a complication following childbirth. In response, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas wrote: “Such unfortunate repercussions — denial of relief to military personnel and distortions of other areas of law to compensate — will continue to ripple through our jurisprudence as long as the Court refuses to reconsider Feres.” 

Then in 2020, Congress made a notable change to the Feres doctrine when it passed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) including an exception “for personal injury or death incident to the service of a member of the uniformed services that was caused by the medical malpractice of a Department of Defense health care provider.” 

Still, the doctrine remains largely intact. 

Army Col. Kathryn Spletstoser speaks to members of the media on Capitol Hill.
Army Col. Kathryn Spletstoser speaks to members of the media following Hyten’s confirmation hearing to be vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on Capitol Hill in July 2019. (Andrew Harnik/AP)

What led to Spletstoser’s lawsuit?

In December 2017, Spletstoser attended a two-day defense forum in Simi Valley, California.  The evening after the forum concluded, Spletstoser, who was one year into her tenure as a leader within the highest echelons of military command, was getting ready for bed when she heard an unexpected knock on her hotel door. It was Hyten, a general and her superior who also attended the forum, wearing workout clothes. He was staying in the room across the hall. According to court documents, Hyten grabbed, groped, kissed and rubbed his body on Spletstoser against her will — all while declaring he wanted to “make love,” she alleged.  

In a 2019 interview with The New York Times, Spletstoser said Hyten had tried to kiss, hug and touch her inappropriately while in the office or on trips multiple times in 2017. She had even threatened to tell his wife but said she had no intentions of coming forward because she thought Hyten would soon retire. But when Hyten was nominated by former President Donald Trump to the second-highest ranking military job in the country, Spletstoser said she had a “moral responsibility” to speak out. 

Hyten denied the allegations in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee in 2019 at his confirmation hearing to be the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: “I want to state to you and to the American people in the strongest possible terms that these allegations are false. … Nothing happened. Ever.” 

He retired from the military in November 2021, and became an executive and adviser for Blue Origin, Jeff Bezos’s space company. 

John E. Hyten testifies before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Capitol Hill.
U.S. Air Force Gen. John E. Hyten testifies before the Senate Armed Services Committee on his appointment as the next Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in July 2019 in Washington, D.C. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)

What happens next? 

The court opinion is a “great first step,” but Christensen cautioned that more still needs to happen: The case has yet to be adopted in other circuit courts or appealed to the Supreme Court. 

For now, the ruling only applies to assaults that occurred within the 9th Circuit’s jurisdiction, the largest circuit court of appeals, which covers Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, the Northern Mariana Islands and Guam. 

Legal experts said it was most likely that the case will be appealed to the Supreme Court — which might take years to play out. Lorry Fenner, a retired Air Force colonel and SWAN’s incoming director of government operations and relations, said even then, she is not sure the Court will side with the 9th Circuit.

“It is traditional that the Court defer to the military,” Fenner said. “Congress defers to the military. In my opinion, with the current constitution of this Supreme Court, I can’t see them not siding with the military.” 

Though the court process could take time, experts agreed Congress or the military itself might step in. In recent years, there have been other major changes to the military justice system, particularly when it comes to sexual assault. 

Last year, Rep. Jackie Speier, a Democrat from California, spearheaded legislation which removed cases of sexual assault, domestic violence, stalking, murder, manslaughter, kidnapping and other special victim offenses from the chain of command. These specific crimes are now investigated by independent prosecutors. Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand’s broader companion bill — which would have removed military commanders entirely from the chain of command in all serious crimes —  was stripped from the legislation at the last minute but is expected to be included in the 2023 proposed NDAA.  

Share

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Email

Help sustain what we started

Your monthly investment is critical to our sustainability as a nonprofit newsroom.

Donate Today

Become a member

Up Next

Jolina Olivia Diaz, a transgender female inmate, makes jewelry in the yard of a men's prison in California.

LGBTQ+

Gender dysphoria is a protected disability, federal appeals court finds

Experts say the opinion gives transgender people a powerful tool to advocate for their rights in workplaces, prisons, schools and hospitals.

Read the Story

The 19th
The 19th is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization. Our stories are free to republish in accordance with these guidelines.

  • Donate
  • Newsletter
  • Events
  • Search
  • Jobs
  • Fellowships
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Community Guidelines
  • Membership
  • Membership FAQ
  • Major Gifts
  • Sponsorship
  • Privacy
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram