Keanu Ortiz was convicted by a court-martial of possessing and distributing child pornography and received a two-year prison sentence and a dishonorable discharge. During the military appellate process, he challenged the participation of a military judge who had also been appointed to the Court of Military Commission Review. The Supreme Court held that it had appellate jurisdiction to review decisions of the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. The court-martial system is judicial in character, has constitutional foundations, provides ordinary judicial protections, and produces judgments with ordinary res judicata and double-jeopardy effects. The Court therefore held that its review of the military appellate judgment was appellate rather than original jurisdiction, even though the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces is not an Article III court. It modified the decisions below and addressed the statutory and constitutional objections to the judge’s assignment. Justice Alito, joined by Justices Thomas and Gorsuch, dissented, arguing that the Court lacked power to review an Executive Branch tribunal directly.