Defense secretaries would have to document specific grounds before removing an officer from a military promotion recommendation under a bill backed by U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York. Officers would also gain a chance to respond and seek an expedited independent review.
Gillibrand announced her support Monday for the Military Officer Promotion Integrity Act, a proposal introduced in the Senate Sept. 24 and referred to the Armed Services Committee. The measure has not become law, and the release did not identify a committee vote or timetable for one.
The proposal responds to concerns that political or ideological considerations could influence promotions. Gillibrand accused Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth of blocking qualified officers, including women and minority officers. Those are the senator's allegations; the bill text establishes proposed procedures rather than a finding about any individual promotion decision.
Under the seven-page bill, the defense secretary could remove an officer chosen by a promotion board only after a written determination based on misconduct, newly discovered material adverse information, loss of a statutory qualification, or national security or military necessity. The determination would have to identify the ground, factual findings and supporting evidence and meet a substantial-evidence standard.
What officers could challenge
Before a final removal decision, the officer would receive written notice and the factual basis for the proposed action. The officer could submit written material within a reasonable period, and the secretary would have to consider it. Within 15 days of a final decision, the secretary would notify the officer and congressional defense committees.
The proposal would bar a removal decision based on an officer's participation in or statements connected with a lawful Defense Department policy, program, ceremony or other official activity authorized at the time. It defines misconduct to include a military-law violation, substantiated adverse findings by a competent authority, conduct leading to removal from command or separation proceedings, or conduct materially showing the officer cannot perform at the proposed grade.
An officer who petitioned a military records correction board within 15 days of receiving the final decision would have the removal stayed while the board reviewed it. The board would have 180 days to complete an expedited review. If it removed the adverse information underlying the decision or found a violation of the proposed rules, the secretary would have to vacate the decision, reconsider the promotion recommendation and issue a new written determination.
Bill remains a proposal
The legislation would require the responsible military secretary to set implementing procedures within 180 days after enactment. That deadline would not begin unless Congress passed the bill and it became law. The text does not guarantee promotion to an officer whose removal is overturned; it requires reconsideration.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut introduced the Senate bill with Gillibrand and Sens. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Jacky Rosen of Nevada and Mazie Hirono of Hawaii. The release also names Reps. Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania and Marilyn Strickland of Washington as House sponsors, but does not provide a House bill number.
Gillibrand said officers who earned promotion should be judged on qualifications. VoteVets, Protect Democracy, the National Women's Law Center and retired Maj. Gen. Steve Lepper were listed as supporters. The bill's future depends on action in Congress; its standards do not apply to current promotion decisions while it remains pending.
FingerLakes1.com is the region’s leading all-digital news publication. The company was founded in 1998 and has been keeping residents informed for more than two decades. Have a lead? Send it to news@fingerlakes1.com.