Brushing back an argument by a law professor who filed a brief and orally argued as a friend of the court, the Supreme Court of the United States held yesterday in Ortiz v. United States that its statutory grant of jurisdiction to review decisions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces is constitutional. The Court had previously reviewed 9 CAAF cases without controversy over its jurisdiction, but now it has laid the matter to rest. This aspect of the case will inevitably be closely studied in Federal Courts classes across the country. Reaching the merits, the decision also rejects a claim that judges cannot serve simultaneously on the Court of Military Commission Review and one of the four service Courts of Criminal Appeals. Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the Court. Justice Clarence Thomas joined in that opinion but added a concurring opinion. Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented.