Building Trust Through True Representation

For over two decades, public concern regarding sexual assault, harassment, and discrimination in the military has been steadily rising. Tragic incidents and high-profile cases — most notably, the murder of Army Specialist Vanessa Guillén in 2020 — have highlighted deep flaws in the military justice system, galvanizing calls for reform. Specialist Guillén’s story underscored the need for greater accountability and victim support, and the public demanded changes to address longstanding issues of oversight and impartiality.

In response, the Department of Defense launched the Office of the Special Trial Counsel (OSTC), giving prosecutorial authority over sexual assault and other serious crimes to independent counsel, removing commanders from decision-making in these cases. This reform was seen as a step toward justice for victims and a shift away from the status quo.

Missteps in Leadership: The Firing of the First Special Trial Counsel

Yet, despite this promising structural change, obstacles persist. In December 2023, the Army's first lead Special Trial Counsel was removed from the role after past comments came to light that trivialized victims’ assault allegations. This swift removal highlighted the difficulty of ensuring leadership aligned with the OSTC's mission to uphold fairness and victim protection, and it underscored the complexities in changing a military culture that has historically struggled with gender inclusivity.

The timing of this firing also shed light on another concerning issue within the Army’s legal community: the lack of female representation in the senior ranks of the Judge Advocate General (JAG) Corps. At the time, the Army JAG Corps had only one female general officer, who was placed in an instructional role at the JAG School rather than in a position of strategic influence or command. The optics of this assignment raised questions about the Corps' commitment to integrating women into high-stakes leadership roles.

Systemic Gaps: Women in the JAG Corps

One year later, the composition of JAG Corps leadership reveals that the faces may have changed, but the underlying issue remains. Although the Army has replaced the sole female general officer, the new appointee is, once again, assigned to the JAG School. This placement, while valuable, risks reinforcing a troubling perception: that women in JAG Corps leadership are assigned for the sake of diversity without being fully integrated into operational roles where they can drive critical decisions and policy changes.

Compounding this issue is the disparity in gender representation within the Corps’ recruitment process. Although women have outnumbered men in law school for nearly a decade — comprising 56.25% of law students as recently as 2023 — the Army JAG Corps continues to recruit disproportionately fewer women. The lack of female officers stands in contrast to the enlisted ranks, where the gender gap is not nearly as pronounced. This discrepancy highlights an issue rooted in the officer recruitment and accessions process, which the JAG Corps directly controls. Unlike the enlisted ranks, where the Army has made some strides toward gender balance, the officer corps lags significantly, indicating that structural barriers to female advancement remain unaddressed.

The Problem of Tokenism in Leadership Roles

The assignment of the only female general officer to an instructional position at the JAG School reflects a broader issue with how the Army perceives and places women in its senior ranks. In military culture, command roles — especially in field or operational settings — are essential for career advancement and influence. By funneling female general officers into roles that, while important, lack the operational authority of other assignments, the Army risks creating a perception that female leaders are present for appearance’s sake rather than for genuine influence.

This kind of tokenism limits the Corps' ability to foster meaningful change. True inclusivity demands that women have access to diverse roles, not just in training environments but in positions that allow them to shape policy, affect decision-making, and visibly lead within the ranks. Without such opportunities, the Army is likely to continue reinforcing outdated norms rather than fully benefiting from the leadership, insight, and experience that women bring to the table.

A Call for True Integration

Addressing sexual harassment, discrimination, and the fair treatment of victims requires leaders who not only understand the importance of these issues but also reflect the diversity of the people they serve. As the Army looks to strengthen its response to these ongoing concerns, it must also commit to a leadership structure that includes women in roles of genuine authority. The lack of female representation among general officers, especially in positions outside the JAG School, limits the potential for a diverse perspective on the pressing issues of justice and accountability within the military.

If the Army is to evolve, it must move beyond symbolic appointments and work to integrate women meaningfully at all levels of leadership. Doing so would not only reinforce the OSTC’s mission but also signal to the public — and the Corps itself — that the Army values diversity as a pathway to true reform, rather than as a box to be checked. Without such a commitment, the Army risks continuing the cycle of underrepresentation, reinforcing a perception of tokenism, and leaving a critical gap in its leadership. Now is the time to ensure that gender inclusivity within the JAG Corps is as impactful as it is visible, laying the groundwork for a military justice system that upholds the values of fairness, equity, and accountability for all.