Professor Roosevelt’s comments (see below) capture a significant historical and ironic antecedent. But his comments leave unexplored a possible motive for Captain Crozier’s means of communication. Captain Crozier may logically believe that no resort to chain command appeals would lead to protection for his sailors. He may believe, as does this writer, that our chains of command are controlled by the Interests of Wall Street and the private contracting establishment. American service-members always take third place to these interests. Like the Fukushima poisoned sailors (also see below) of the USS Ronald Reagan, as well as the burn pit poisoned veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan battlefields, Captain Crozier's sailors' traumas and injuries would be buried in the doublespeak of the chain of command and the complicity of the American legal system.
Delbert Spurlock: Former Army General Counsel, Assistant Secretary of the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs, and Deputy Secretary of Labor
Captain Crozier Is a Hero
Theodore Roosevelt, my great-grandfather, would agree.
By Tweed Roosevelt
Mr. Roosevelt is a great-grandson of Theodore Roosevelt and the chairman of the Theodore Roosevelt Institute at Long Island University.
April 3, 2020
On Monday, Capt. Brett Crozier, the commander of the aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt, sent a letter to the Navy pleading for permission to unload his crew, including scores of sailors sickened with Covid-19, in Guam, where it was docked. The Pentagon had been dragging its feet, and the situation on the ship was growing dire.
“We are not at war,” he wrote. “Sailors do not need to die. If we do not act now, we are failing to properly take care of our most trusted asset — our sailors.”
After the letter was leaked to The San Francisco Chronicle, the Navy relented. But on Thursday, it relieved Captain Crozier of his command. Captain Crozier joins a growing list of heroic men and women who have risked their careers over the last few weeks to speak out about lifethreatening failures to treat the victims of this terrible pandemic. Many of them are doctors and nurses, and many of them, like Captain Crozier, have been punished. All of them deserve our deepest gratitude.
In removing Captain Crozier, the Navy said that his letter was a gross error that could incite panic among his crew. But it’s hard to know what else he could have done — the situation on the Theodore Roosevelt was dire.
Ships at sea, whether Navy carriers or cruise ships, are hotbeds for this disease. Social distancing is nearly impossible: The sailors are practically on top of one another all day, in crowded messes, in cramped sleeping quarters and on group watches. It is thought that a sailor caught the virus while on shore leave in Vietnam. Once on board, the virus took its now predictable course: First a sailor or two, then dozens, and all of a sudden more than 100 were sick.
Captain Crozier received orders to take the ship to Guam, but he was not given permission to offload most of the sailors. The virus was threatening to overwhelm the small medical crew aboard. There was not much time before sailors might start dying.
The captain felt he had to act immediately if he was to save his sailors. He chose to write a strong letter, which he distributed to a number of people within the Navy, demanding immediate removal from the ship of as many sailors as possible. Perhaps this was not the best approach for his career, but it got results.
The letter, once leaked to The Chronicle, quickly reappeared in papers nationwide. The immediate public pressure forced the Navy to relent, and it started arranging to get as many of the crew members as possible off the ship and into hotels in Guam.
Captain Crozier, however, paid a big price. The acting secretary of the Navy, Thomas Modly, summarily fired the captain, not for leaking the letter (for which he said he had no proof), but for showing “extremely poor judgment.” Many disagree, believing that Captain Crozier showed excellent judgment. He left the ship Thursday night to a rousing hero’s sendoff.
I suppose it is too much to hope that the Navy, if only for its own benefit, will see its way to reverse this unfortunate decision. But it is probably too late to save Captain Crozier’s career.
As a descendant of the namesake of Captain Crozier’s former command, I often wonder, in situations like this, what Theodore Roosevelt would have done. In this case, though, I know exactly what he would have done. In 1898, he found himself in almost the exact same position.
Before his rise to national politics, Roosevelt commanded the Rough Riders, a volunteer cavalry regiment, in the invasion of Cuba during the Spanish-American War. The Battle of San Juan Hill had been fought and won, and the war was basically over. However, the soldiers, still deployed in Cuba, faced a far worse enemy: yellow fever and malaria.
As was usual in the days before modern medicine, far more soldiers died of disease than of enemy action. The battlefield commanders, including Roosevelt, wanted to bring the soldiers home. But the leadership in Washington — in particular Russell Alger, the secretary of war — refused, fearing a political backlash. A standoff ensued.
The career Army officers, who did not want to risk their jobs by being too outspoken, were stymied. Roosevelt, as a short-term volunteer, had less to lose. So, with the tacit approval of his fellow commanders, he wrote a fiery open letter and released it to the press.
The letter, known as the “round robin,” was printed in virtually every newspaper in the country, creating an uproar demanding that the soldiers be brought home immediately. Alger relented, and the troops were sent to quarantine on the end of Long Island, at Montauk Point. Though hundreds of men died of disease in Cuba, Roosevelt’s actions probably saved countless more.
He did, however, pay a price. Alger was furious with him. When Roosevelt’s nomination came up for a Medal of Honor, the secretary shot it down (Roosevelt eventually received the medal, posthumously, in 2001). Of course, Roosevelt came out the winner. Who today remembers Russell Alger?
In this era when so many seem to place expediency over honor, it is heartening that so many others are showing great courage, some even risking their lives. Theodore Roosevelt, in his time, chose the honorable course. Captain Crozier has done the same.
Judge Tosses Fukushima Radiation Class Action
March 4, 2019 By Bianca Bruno
SAN DIEGO – Hundreds of American sailors who filed two class actions claiming to have suffered physical abnormalities, cancer and death stemming from exposure to radiation while on a humanitarian mission to Fukushima, Japan in 2011 were dealt a blow Monday when their cases were dismissed, paving the way for their claims to be brought in Japan.
U.S. District Judge Janis Sammartino found in a “close call” in two separate orders, class actions brought against Tokyo Electric Power Company, or TEPCO, and General Electric, should be dismissed without prejudice so the service members’ claims could be brought in Japan if they choose to revive them.
The Navy sailors brought two class action cases against TEPCO and GE in 2012 and 2017 over claims they’ve suffered – or will suffer in the future – serious physical injuries, cancer and death due to radiation they were exposed to while serving on the USS Ronald Reagan.
The sailors were sent on a humanitarian mission to deliver aid and supplies following the earthquake, tsunami and nuclear meltdown of a reactor designed by GE and operated by TEPCO that followed the natural disaster in Fukushima in March 2011. Sammartino previously dismissed the 2017 class action without prejudice, finding the court lacked jurisdiction over the acts related to the meltdown of the Fukushima-Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant.
In November, the parties gathered in Sammartino’s courtroom to argue whether or not the Southern District of California had personal jurisdiction over the claims, which could be brought in Japan under its Compensation for Nuclear Damage Act. Under Japan’s Compensation for Nuclear Damage Act, GE, as manufacturer of the nuclear reactor, is shielded from liability which falls on the operator of a nuclear plant. Claims can still be brought against TEPCO, however, which has already paid over $70 billion to compensate those affected by the disaster.
Former Sen. John Edwards, an attorney for the class members, previously told Sammartino if the cases were dismissed in the U.S., the sailors wouldn’t “go to Japan and hire Japanese lawyers,” effectively foreclosing their claims.
In her order Monday, Sammartino found under choice-of-law that Japanese law should apply to the claims after weighing the competing interests of California law, which would include product liability claims against GE, and Japanese law, which has an interest in imposing liability “based on and consistent with the Compensation Act” and Japan’s “large investment in responding to the disaster.”
While the judge found both jurisdictions have a “strong interest” in its laws being applied to the claims, Japan’s interest outweighs California’s.
“The court finds no convincing support for plaintiffs’ assertion that Japanese law will leave them with ‘minimal and insufficient damages’ requiring the U.S. Government or California to pick up the financial balance,” Sammartino wrote.
“While plaintiffs’ contention that litigating in the Japanese forum will be exponentially more difficult than litigating in California may be true, plaintiffs have shown no law or facts that indicate that the Japanese forum is closed to any of the named, or unnamed, plaintiffs,” she added.
Sammartino dismissed the claims against GE pursuant to the Compensation Act.
As for the claims against TEPCO, Sammartino echoed her findings regarding the claims against GE finding Japan would be “more impaired” than California if its laws were not applied to the sailors’ claims, especially in light of the Japanese government’s creation of the Nuclear Damage Compensation and Decommissioning Facilitation Fund, NDF, providing $75 billion to TEPCO to resolve claims stemming from the nuclear disaster.
“The Japanese government explained that if United States’ law is applied, it could result in inconsistent adjudication of claims, which would be ‘highly corrosive to the integrity of the compensation system,’ not only for reasons of fairness to the claimants, but also the continued viability of funding of the NDF,” Sammartino wrote.
The class members are represented by former Sen. John Edwards and Catharine Edwards with Edwards Kirby in North Carolina, Charles Bonner and Cabral Bonner of Sausalito, California and Paul Garner of Carlsbad California.
Garner called the dismissal an “incredible travesty of justice.”
“Any suggestion that these U.S. humanitarians, who are sick and dying, are able to or can receive meaningful compensation in Japan is a total fiction. We intend to take further steps to obtain our clients’ American constitutional rights to seek redress for the defendants’ admitted culpability for their wanton harm in the United States justice system,” Garner said in an email.
TEPCO is represented by Gregory Stone with Munger Tolles and Olson.
Ryounosuke Takanori, a global communications manager for TEPCO, said in an email: “We understand that the court agreed with our view. We will look into the court’s ruling and continue to respond to this case appropriately.”
GE is represented by Michael Schissel with Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer.
