Justice and discipline have shaped the U.S. Navy since the inception of the American republic, in ways the reflect the meaning of citizenship and the culture of the nation. In the early Navy, ordinary sailors were mostly drawn from the lowest socioeconomic classes and brutally disciplined through sheer physical domination by upper-class officers. Flogging was a fairly routine punishment. By the 1970s, naval officers were wondering in public forums if discipline should be managed through non-coercive measures, arguing that sailors should be treated like lawyers or other members of a professional guild. America changed, so naval discipline changed. National politics reached into the Navy. Flogging was banned as a naval punishment because it became a symbol of slavery and an anti-republican model of manhood. Southern, pro-slavery members of Congress voted against a flogging ban introduced by their abolitionist counterparts. Another important reality of naval discipline is that it has revealed the character of leaders in ways they often didn’t notice or intend. Bad captains relied on punitive measures to control their crews; in a healthy command culture, fewer sailors requiredpunishment to motivate them to do their jobs. Finally, the post-World War II “civilianization” of naval justice has radically changed the procedural safeguards that protect sailors who face punishment for wrongdoing. But considerable debate continues: How far should civilianization go? How distinct is naval justice, and how much should it be set apart from the norms and expectations of civilian justice? In readings selected from Navy and Marine Corps leaders with direct experience in the naval justice system, this book shows how the Navy court-martial has changed over the decades, and how it hasn’t, revealing the purpose and meaning of justice and discipline in the American sea services.