Soldier continues fight not to serve under U.N.

Michael New claims U.S. Constitution forbids military from donning blue beret

A U.S. soldier court-martialed for refusing to wear the insignia and blue beret of the United Nations and serve under the world body's command is now appealing his case to a federal appeals court.

Michael New was among several hundred troops sent to Macedonia by President Clinton in 1995 on a U.N. peacekeeping mission. But New refused to obey the order, calling it illegal for him to serve under a foreign power.

New's attorney, Henry L. Hamilton, argued both Clinton's order to deploy troops to Macedonia and his order for soldiers to wear the U.N. uniform were illegal, because deployment required congressional approval, and the U.N. uniform is not authorized by either the Department of Defense or the U.S. Army.

Now the former Army specialist is preparing for oral hearings Feb. 16 in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

His attorneys says the issue is whether an American soldier, having taken an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, may be forced instead to serve under the military command of a foreign power.

Military courts ruled this was a political question, outside their jurisdiction. New argues he has been denied the right to have the legality of the order addressed by a jury.

U.S. District Court Judge Friedman, who ruled against New, conceded Clinton may have broken the law, but contended it's the duty of Congress to challenge the president, not a soldier.

New's lead attorney, Herbert W. Titus, of Virginia, says the case has "serious implications for every American who ever wears a uniform."