Jokes aside, the fact that the President as commander-in-chief is a civilian and not an officer of the military is actually quite fundamental to civilian control of the military in the USA.
Officer of the military ≠ officer in the military.
Categorically, a civilian is not in the military. However, the Commander in Chief position grants the civilian hierarchy and command over the military. If POTUS/Commander in Chief is considered to be a held office of the US (the point of contention in the Colorado case), due to its hierarchical position and scope of action, it is then an office of the military without being in the military.
Is there some detail that I’m missing with the tenet of civilian control over the military that you mentioned?
Jokes aside, the fact that the President as commander-in-chief is a civilian and not an officer of the military is actually quite fundamental to civilian control of the military in the USA.
I think I have to be pedantic to address this.
Officer of the military ≠ officer in the military.
Categorically, a civilian is not in the military. However, the Commander in Chief position grants the civilian hierarchy and command over the military. If POTUS/Commander in Chief is considered to be a held office of the US (the point of contention in the Colorado case), due to its hierarchical position and scope of action, it is then an office of the military without being in the military.
Is there some detail that I’m missing with the tenet of civilian control over the military that you mentioned?
I think you have out-pedanted me.