Abstract

In February, 1958, Master Sergeant James B. Stanley, while stationed at Ft. Knox, Kentucky, responded to a posted announcement requesting volunteers to participate in an Army program intended to aid in the development and testing of defenses to chemical warfare. Shortly after arriving at Edgewood Arsenal in Aberdeen, Maryland, the site of the testing program, civilian and military officials interviewed Stanley and asked him to drink a clear liquid. The liquid, unknown to Stanley, contained lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD). This incident changed James Stanley's life forever and led to a series of court claims that culminated in a Supreme Court decision that also altered the lives of all United States military personnel.

James Stanley was one of over 1000 army personnel who participated in secret experiments designed to test the effects of hallucinogenic drugs on human beings. Stanley's challenge to the deliberate and surreptitious drug experimentation reached the Supreme Court in its 1987 term. The Stanley decision foreclosed the possibility of a soldier recovering damages on the grounds that these experiments violated the soldiers' constitutional rights. This note argues that the intentional use of military personnel for drug and nuclear experimentation is unconstitutional and immoral conduct that should be deterred, not condoned, by the courts. In the absence of judicial action, it is the responsibility of Congress to provide a right of action to soldiers for constitutional violations. This note also discusses the development of the FERES doctrine, the nuclear and drug testing experiments conducted by the United States government on human beings, and examines in detail the decisions leading up to the Supreme Court decision in Stanley.

How to Cite