Posted on Mar 7, 2019
1SG David Niles
5.38K
35
21
5
5
0
So recently the Supreme Court declined to consider if it is constitutional that retired service members are subject to the UCMJ trial by court martial for actions taken in the civilian world against civilians. What this means is that they agree that it is constitutional, that you can be court marshaled and sentence while being retired. Did you know this? Do you agree? In two of the cases where the navy did this to one and I believe the army did this to another they reduce in rank, dishonorable discharge, and prison time. One was enlisting and the other was officer. This means they lost their pension as well.?
Posted in these groups: Retirement logo RetirementUcmj UCMJ
Avatar feed
Responses: 12
MAJ Ken Landgren
4
4
0
Edited 5 y ago
I think it is profoundly stupid to say receiving a military pension is consent to UCMJ.
(4)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
Maj John Bell
3
3
0
If your pay check says US Treasury and your offense brings discredit upon the military service in a very public manner... you get hammered. That was and is my understanding from day 1.
(3)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
1SG Dennis Hicks
2
2
0
One of the qualifiers to this little GEM will be is it cost effective to bring SPC back on AD, assign a JAG officer, quarter, pay and tie up resources because he SAID a POTUS was a POOPYHEAD or flipped the bird to some COL. I think it would not be cost effective to do this and I think it is just a tool in the tool box for something actually serious. I have no fears of being recalled for another blue book for being an A-hole.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close