User:Geo Swan/Rachel E. VanLandingham

Rachel E. VanLandingham is an American lawyer, currently working as a Professor at the Southern Law Centre, who was previously a military lawyer for the United States Air Force. She specializes in Military Law and National Security Law.

VanLandingham attended the United States Air Force Academy. She then earned another Bachelor's degree, in Political Science, in 1992, from the University of Maryland. She earned a Masters of Public Management from the University of Texas at Austin in 1996. She earned a law degree from the Judge Advocate General’s School in 2000.

VanLandingham joined in a group of 2,400 law professors who published an open letter to United States Senate to not appoint Brett Kavanaugh to the United States Supreme Court.

Quoted by the Press
News media have sought out VanLandingham for her expert opinion.

Fatal SEALs beatings
The New York Times quoted VanLandingham when the US Navy SEAL command declined to prosecute to two SEALs even though the NCIS investigation seemed to show they beat captives to death.

The Kunduz Hospital bombing
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/05/08/kunduz-doctors-without-borders-msf-court-martial-afghanistan-bomb-strike-column/84040012/

The Devin Kelley case
Vice News sought her opinion on the US Air Force's response to Devin Patrick Kelley's domestic violence. Kelley had beaten both his wife and her son, and had been given a sentence of only 12 months, even though her son suffered traumatic brain injury. Kelley then went on to kill 26 people. VanLandingham described the 12 month sentence as shockingly light. She said the jury members "didn’t take this crime as seriously as they probably should have.”

The Matthew Golsteyn case
On January 5, 2019, VanLandingham was a guest on WGN Radio Legal roundup, where she was called upon for her opinion on the Matthew Golsteyn case.

The Washington Post sought out VanLandingham's opinion on an account Matthew Golsteyn of how he came to kill an unarmed Afghan civilian. VanLandingham predicted his court martial would revolve around whether Golsteyn could establish the unarmed Afghan showed hostile intentions, and he, Golsteyn, followed the established rules of engagement.