Amending Executive Order 11016 To Update Eligibility Criteria for Award of the Purple Heart

Overview

Purpose and Intent

Executive Order 13758, signed by President Barack Obama on January 12, 2017, amends the eligibility criteria for the award of the Purple Heart, a military decoration awarded in the name of the President to those wounded or killed while serving. This amendment was necessary to address evolving threats and combat scenarios, specifically extending eligibility to cover injuries resulting from terrorist attacks inspired by foreign organizations and from friendly fire incidents during armed conflict. The clarification and expansion of criteria also provide a legal framework to ensure consistency in awarding this honor across the military branches.

Context of the Amendment

Prior to this amendment, the eligibility criteria for the Purple Heart, as outlined in Executive Order 11016, primarily focused on injuries sustained in traditional combat scenarios. However, with the nature of warfare evolving to include asymmetric threats such as terrorism and the increasing occurrence of friendly fire incidents, there was a compelling need to modernize the award's eligibility criteria. This amendment responds to these realities, ensuring that those who sacrifice in less traditional combat scenarios receive due recognition.

Summary of Changes

The significant changes include the addition of new categories for eligibility, such as wounds resulting from terrorist attacks recognized by the appropriate department secretaries and injuries due to friendly fire in armed conflict. The order also clarifies procedures for posthumous awards and adds stipulations to prevent the award in cases of willful misconduct. These updates reflect a balance between honoring service members' sacrifices and maintaining the integrity and intended purpose of the Purple Heart.

Impact on Military Procedures

The amendment necessitates updates to the military's administrative processes for awarding the Purple Heart. It establishes a more inclusive understanding of who qualifies for the award, prompting military departments to adjust their evaluations of eligible service-related injuries. The inclusion of injuries from non-traditional combat scenarios, like terrorism, requires the relevant departments to develop standards and processes for assessing these applications fairly and consistently.

Presidential Authority

The changes are enacted by the President's constitutional authority as Commander in Chief, highlighting the executive branch's role in regulating military honors. While the order directly affects the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security, it underscores the executive's broader capability to address contemporary challenges faced by military personnel and ensure that recognition mechanisms keep pace with evolving military engagements.

Legal and Policy Implications

Constitutional Authority

Executive Order 13758 operates under the President's constitutional authority as the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, a power that allows for the regulation of the military and related matters such as service members' recognition. This order exemplifies how the executive branch can unilaterally alter military regulations to adapt to new strategic realities, underlining the Commander in Chief's broad discretion in military affairs.

Statutory Amendments

The amendment does not directly alter statutory law but modifies the application of existing laws regarding military decorations. Specifically, it refers to titles within the United States Code, ensuring the application of these titles aligns with contemporary combat scenarios. For instance, the recognition of injuries from international and inspired terrorist attacks aligns with policies addressing post-9/11 combat realities.

Implementation and Challenges

The legal framework set by this executive order requires the respective military departments to develop rules and criteria for determining eligibility under the new provisions. This may involve changes to internal guidelines, additional training for military personnel involved in awarding these honors, and potentially updating regulatory documents to align with this expanded criteria.

Policy Shifts

Policy implications of this order reflect a shift towards acknowledging the modern soldier's experience in an increasingly complex global combat environment. It demonstrates an official recognition of the psychological and physical challenges unique to contemporary military service distinct from traditional warfare. This acknowledgement refines the criteria for recognition, ensuring policies remain relevant and reflective of actual service conditions.

Jurisdictional Implications for the Coast Guard

The inclusion of the Secretary of Homeland Security in relation to the Coast Guard when it is not operating under Navy jurisdiction underscores the Coast Guard's unique dual military and law enforcement roles. It clarifies procedural responsibilities and reinforces multi-agency cooperation in administering military honors.

Who Benefits

Active Military Personnel

The primary beneficiaries of this executive order are active service members who may receive recognition for injuries sustained under the newly expanded criteria. Service members who are wounded by terrorist actions or friendly fire during armed conflict can now be awarded the Purple Heart. This broadens the scope of recognition to include hazardous but previously non-recognized circumstances.

Veterans

Former service members who sustained qualifying injuries in past conflicts might become eligible for the Purple Heart retroactively, thanks to the revised criteria. This retroactive recognition can provide veterans with validation and official acknowledgment of their service, contributing positively to their and their families' sense of honor and closure.

Military Families

Families of service members killed or injured in scenarios now covered by this order will gain recognition of their loved ones' sacrifices. Posthumous awards validate the seriousness and bravery of the deceased, offering families a formal testament of their relatives' experiences and contributions.

Civilian and Foreign Service Sectors

The inclusion of injuries from terrorist acts signifies a broader recognition of the global combat landscape's interconnectedness. This may potentially support collaboration or lead to mutual agreements between the U.S. military and allied armed services, setting precedents for how other nations treat similar awards, thereby fostering international military cooperation.

Defense Policy Makers

The updated eligibility criteria can aid policymakers by offering tangible measures of service members' experiences across diverse combat and non-combat situations, providing valuable data to inform future defense policies, resource allocation, and strategic planning for veteran services and support.

Who Suffers

Critics of Military Expansion

Individuals or groups critical of military policies that they perceive as expanding military imperialism may view these expanded criteria as further normalizing non-traditional warfare engagement. This perception could increase opposition from peace advocacy groups that see such policies as endorsing broader military interventions over diplomatic resolutions.

Administrators within Military Departments

Administrative personnel responsible for implementing these expanded criteria may face hurdles. These include navigating additional bureaucratic layers, potential confusion over new eligibility determinations, and administrative burden due to the expanded criteria, all requiring careful management and adjustment phase, possibly stretching resources and timelines.

Budget Allocation Concerns

Allocating funds for implementing changes might constrain budgets previously fixed for military awards and recognition programs. This could lead to funding challenges either in general military operations or in programs focusing on personnel welfare, requiring careful appraisal to maintain balanced funding across the board.

Potential Misuse Concerns

The new provisions, although designed with integrity, open potential misinterpretation risks—particularly around the "friendly fire" and "terrorist attack" clauses. Some might view these as opportunities for exploitation to improperly claim military honors, necessitating robust verification methods to impede such incidents and preserve the order's intended effect.

Traditionalists within Military Ranks

Traditionalist elements within the military, who might advocate for preserving long-standing criteria for military honors, could argue that broadening the criteria diminishes the prestige of the Purple Heart. These voices may caution against the dilution of the award and could call for clear guidelines to preserve the honor's integrity.

Historical Context

Evolution of Military Recognition

The Purple Heart's updated criteria through this executive order reflect an ongoing evolution in military awards responding to changing warfare and threat dynamics. The modern amendments encapsulate a broader trend of increasing recognition for varied service experiences across different conflict types, adapting military honor codes to meet the complexities of current military engagement.

Post-9/11 Military Realities

The inclusion of foreign terrorist organizations in the Purple Heart criteria echoes shifts in U.S. military policy post-September 11, acknowledging the complexity and non-linear nature of modern terrorism-related engagements. This aligns the order with federal strategies addressing these global security threats, recognizing service members' roles in counter-terrorism operations.

Legacy of Executive Military Oversight

This executive order fits within a broader pattern of post-World War II executive actions refining military roles and honors. Historically, Presidents have adapted military regulations to adequately address and reward service members' changing roles and contributions across different conflict landscapes, representing a consistent thread in U.S. military policy evolution.

Dovetailing with Modern Military Doctrine

As military doctrine evolves to encompass hybrid warfare tactics, including cyber capabilities and irregular combat methods, the executive order serves as a policy instrument reinforcing the U.S. military's focus on flexibility and responsiveness. By institutionalizing recognition norms for diverse combat experiences, it supports a military framework adaptable to modern challenges.

Administration's Broader Defense Agenda

Within the Obama administration's broader defense agenda, emphasizing adaptability and modernization, this order signifies continuity. It demonstrates commitment to supporting military personnel effectively while aligning honor systems with sophisticated threat environments, underscoring the administration's ethos of responsive governance and military preparedness.

Potential Controversies or Challenges

Legal Disputes over Implementation

Potential legal challenges may arise over what constitutes eligibility, particularly regarding interpretations of "terrorist attack" or "friendly fire" within the combat context. Ensuring consistent application across departments could be legally scrutinized, demanding clear procedural implementations to avoid disparate treatment of service members.

Congressional Oversight and Queries

Congress may scrutinize this order, particularly related to its implementation impact on defense budgets or regarding concerns about the potential overextension of military awards. Lawmakers could question the administration's unilateral decision-making in this context, potentially prompting hearings or demands for additional oversight measures.

Verification and Fraud Concerns

There is a possibility of controversy surrounding how injuries are verified, particularly where terrorist involvement or the intent behind friendly fire is ambiguous. Preventing misuse while ensuring genuine cases are honored could be a focal point for future audits or investigations into award processes, necessitating robust safeguards.

Public Perception

The public's understanding of military honors could be influenced by this order, with perceptions of who is deemed a "hero" possibly impacted by expanded criteria. If seen as lowering standards, it might evoke criticism or, conversely, support if perceived as justly inclusive. Public opinion could sway perceptions of military integrity based on the order's outcomes.

Implementation Cohesion

The integration of these changes across multiple military branches demands significant cohesion and collaboration. Ensuring congruent application of the order can present logistical challenges, especially if each branch interprets some criteria differently, vital to maintain uniformity and fairness in awarding the Purple Heart across the entire armed forces landscape.