Should the U.S. modify/eliminate the Uniform Code of Military Justice?

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 19 Jul 2017 19:42:50 -0400

As someone who investigates specific violations of the UCMJ, I find it interesting that many articles mirror already existing federal laws. Such as espionage existing under Article 106a UCMJ, and Title 18 § 794 USC. Granted there is some different wording, but many laws are still duplicated. Could this mean the UCMJ could be reduced significantly?

Response by Jayden Manning made Jul 19 at 2017 7:44 PM

Jayden Manning — Wed, 19 Jul 2017 19:44:27 -0400

Hell no at least revise is one being social media that one pisses me off

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Jul 19 at 2017 7:51 PM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Wed, 19 Jul 2017 19:51:51 -0400

It could certainly be shortened to reduce redundancy, not to mention it could use some scrubbing for relevance. It wasn't that long ago that oral sex was a UCMJ violation, so clearly it can use some updating...

Response by MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P made Jul 19 at 2017 7:56 PM

MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P — Wed, 19 Jul 2017 19:56:54 -0400

I don't think it should be eliminated but it definitely needs to be updated to reflect modern conventions.

Response by CWO3 Dennis M. made Jul 19 at 2017 8:03 PM

CWO3 Dennis M. — Wed, 19 Jul 2017 20:03:09 -0400

Civilian laws are not structured for military use. Those laws are structured to support our constitution and the Bill of rights where all people are created equal.. That just does not fit the military rank system.. The UCMJ exists for the very reason that military justice must be very strict, deliberate and swift as we can not tolerate delays that we see clogging the civilian court system. If there was no UCMJ the military would be reduced to chaos. Just look at what is going on in today's society and court system. Can't you see a seaman claiming his right of equality was stiffed by a Chief Petty officer? Not in my Navy!

Response by SSG Steven Mangus made Jul 19 at 2017 8:17 PM

SSG Steven Mangus — Wed, 19 Jul 2017 20:17:43 -0400

No it should not be removed, updated periodically; sure. The military is a unique profession and requires it's own separate laws to govern. While many articles mirror federal laws, the military is kept separate from civilian laws for a reason..Military service is a complete change in life from the civilian sector. Higher standards need separate laws to be effective..

Response by MSgt Jason McClish made Jul 19 at 2017 8:20 PM

MSgt Jason McClish — Wed, 19 Jul 2017 20:20:53 -0400

No, it shouldn't. As it's often reviewed, there's no major reason to abolish it. Article 134 needs some more clarity for sure. Seems like sneezing during a staff meeting could be an offense.

Response by SSgt GG-15 RET Jim Lint made Jul 19 at 2017 9:22 PM

SSgt GG-15 RET Jim Lint — Wed, 19 Jul 2017 21:22:40 -0400

If we did not have UCMJ, then why not fire CID and 902d and let the local Police Department do it? That is a wild statement but I could see some bean counter fall into that crazy logic and heck, the Laurel, MD Judge could handle the former UCMJ cases....if I keep thinking about this, it will get really stupid and some idiot will think it is a good idea and enact this cost savings! (Get rid of CID and MPs and JAG if there is no UCMJ...)

Response by SPC James Thompson made Jul 19 at 2017 9:31 PM

SPC James Thompson — Wed, 19 Jul 2017 21:31:39 -0400

No, one of the main reasons to have the UCMJ is jurisdiction. Having a uniform code that applies to the entire military on any post in the world also provides consistency rather than having the service member learn all the local laws.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 19 at 2017 9:53 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 19 Jul 2017 21:53:06 -0400

The main advantage of the UCMJ duplicating federal law is jurisdiction. If a Soldier does something outside of the jurisdiction of the federal government there is a way to prosecute that crime. Also it allows the military to handle crimes internally threw the chain of command unsung investigating officers like yourself. It also allows the use of military codes like failure to obey a lawful order, missing movement, AWOL ect

Response by Maj John Bell made Jul 19 at 2017 9:54 PM

Maj John Bell — Wed, 19 Jul 2017 21:54:18 -0400

What then would be the basis for a court martial vs. turning the accused over to civilian courts and civilian juries?

Response by LtCol Robert Quinter made Jul 19 at 2017 10:08 PM

LtCol Robert Quinter — Wed, 19 Jul 2017 22:08:48 -0400

The UCMJ certainly reflects and has many similarities to existing federal laws, however, it is designed for administration and execution by military professionals in situations where civil courts, judges and attorneys are not the norm. It is simple to understand and is centered around judgement by peers; other military personnel who understand the difference in being late for your job at the local plant, and being late relieving a fellow serviceman who has been watching the perimeter for four hours with an enemy all around. We are different and the code is meant to compliment the difference.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 19 at 2017 10:10 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 19 Jul 2017 22:10:51 -0400

The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.
I don't understand how this one clause in the Constitution resulted in a legal system controlled by the Executive branch of the government, with out judicial oversite until an issue reaches the Supreme Court. All the military appeals court are controlled by the executive branch.
In addition this clause "The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment; shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed." would seem to indicate that states should in cases where an accusation was made in the USA handle the accusation. All too often the Military will Court martial a service member who was acquitted in civilian court.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 20 at 2017 1:42 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 20 Jul 2017 01:42:31 -0400

I voted no, but do believe they should be looked at and updated accordingly if required.

Response by SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth made Jul 20 at 2017 6:50 AM

SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth — Thu, 20 Jul 2017 06:50:24 -0400

They need to update and modernize it.

Response by SSgt Rob Millard made Jul 20 at 2017 10:49 AM

SSgt Rob Millard — Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:49:04 -0400

Although there are a number of articles in the punitive section of the UCMJ (77-134) that almost mirror civilian law, I feel there is an essential delineation between the civilian and military stances. DUI off base on a first offense in most states is a fine, court costs, 6 months probation and some mandatory classes. How do you equate that with military justice? Every DUI (article 111) requires a court martial? And the military does not have a "misdemeanor or felony" designation.
Reckless Driving without hurting someone will get you a fine and court costs in the civilian world. Article 111b i worded essentially the same but is far stricter. Espionage and Sabotage and Sedition have civilian equivalents that are not nearly as strict as their military counterparts. But that is as it should be! As military members we are held to a higher standard.
WAR STORY: About 5 years ago there was a disturbance in a local country bat. A drunken urban cowboy was getting pissed because an African American Sergeant with the local SFG was getting more of the ladies attention than him. Well, since alcohol makes your alligator mouth usually override your canary ass, the urban cowboy walked over, called the soldier the "N" word and tries to push him. The Sergeant responded by... as we call it... stomping a mud hole in the urban
Cowboy's ass. We found the Sergeant a few blocks away going back to the base. As I was placing the handcuffs on him, he asked me "Why do I have to be the better man?" To which I replied "Because you are the better man".
That urban cowboy would have spent the night in jail, got out the next day, gone to his job at the landscaping business and everyone would have laughed about it.
That Sergeant would have been put through the ringer with his command and his career would have been damaged if not destroyed.
Of course the urban cowboy had a small amount of weed on him and he figured that he would come out of it better if he didn't press the battery issue.
The Military is many times different (better) than the civilian world! We need separate approaches to the same laws!

Response by COL Mikel J. Burroughs made Jul 20 at 2017 11:14 AM

COL Mikel J. Burroughs — Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:14:52 -0400

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member No, but it shoul dbe reviewed and updated peridocally with changes to fit the changing times and that may very well be happening on a regular basis. I've not researched any of the most recent changes. Have there been updates made to the UCMJ Brad?

Response by Lt Col Jim Coe made Jul 20 at 2017 11:19 AM

Lt Col Jim Coe — Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:19:13 -0400

The military needs its own foundational law that applies in CONUS and OCONUS to protect good order and discipline. Federal law may not apply to crimes committed OCONUS, so the military needs its own set of laws. Additionally there are cases where Federal Law does not address military issues such as desertion. AWOL, and misbehavior before the enemy. UCMJ law against rape, robbery, murder, etc. are necessary OCONUS to ensure appropriate behavior by military personnel, even in combat. Perhaps the UCMJ could be simplified or shortened. Some articles are not often used because of changes in social issues in the US, but might be necessary OCONUS.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 20 at 2017 12:38 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 20 Jul 2017 12:38:28 -0400

Modified - yes. Eliminated - no. Hasn't it been modified over the years though? They updated Art 120 on sexual assault and rape I know that.

Response by CPT Tom Monahan made Jul 20 at 2017 1:46 PM

CPT Tom Monahan — Thu, 20 Jul 2017 13:46:31 -0400

The UCMJ is for Commanders to swiftly and effectively discipline folks in the field. Gen. Washington asked the Contential Congress for these powers. It does not make sense to have troops charged with crimes to be totally removed from theater to stand trial. Having commissioned officers of the US present in theater safeguards the rights of the service member and the government.

Response by SGT Tony Clifford made Jul 20 at 2017 2:16 PM

SGT Tony Clifford — Thu, 20 Jul 2017 14:16:50 -0400

Here's the problem the UCMJ directly conflicts with the constitution in some key places. Some of these areas are essential for militaries to function, but others are wrong.

The obvious one is free speech. You're not allowed to say whatever you want in the military. I've had several people disagree with me about this but I say "tell an insult to your commander and see if you have free speech". You need to show respect to have even the semblance of a functional fighting force. Another is 5th and 7th amendments respectively. You can be tried by both civilian and military courts for the same charge and you don't always get a jury trial in a courts martial. These are both things that should be rectified at least in garrison.

Response by MSgt Gerald Orvis made Jul 20 at 2017 2:51 PM

MSgt Gerald Orvis — Thu, 20 Jul 2017 14:51:50 -0400

The military has always had it's own military justice system, dating back to the original Articles of War, created by Congressional laws pertaining to the government of the military services. The Executive Branch (specifically the military services) execute that law through its own military justice sytem. I believe that a separate but equal justice system for the military is the most equitable way to do things, since the military has unique situations (cowardice in the face of the enemy, desertion, missing movement, disrespect to seniors) that require unique military justice solutions, or the military would not be able to do what it needs to do. The military is not a democracy and its justice system should reflect that, but based on my reading of the old military justice systems (Articles of War, Rocks and Shoals), I believe that today's UCMJ is the fairest system the U.S. military has ever had. I do, however, believe that the UCMJ should be updated to clean it up - it contains crimes (adultery, sex between consenting adults - even if of the same gender - and so forth) that are no longer on the books in civilian law, and cleansing them from the UCMJ would not, IMHO, adversely affect good order and discipline in the services. And the General Articles - where has the equivalent of these vindictive artlcles ever been found in civilian law? And I should know - I was a barrack lawyer once.

Response by COL Richard Perez made Jul 20 at 2017 6:29 PM

COL Richard Perez — Thu, 20 Jul 2017 18:29:43 -0400

No!

Response by MSgt David Heil made Jul 20 at 2017 6:49 PM

MSgt David Heil — Thu, 20 Jul 2017 18:49:20 -0400

There is a reason the UCMJ exists. It exists because of the unique situations involved in military service and the necessity for the maintenance of good order and discipline. Also, after a full career as a military agent (AFOSI) and a civilian federal agent (various agencies) the procedures involved in the military systems and protections afforded the military members are greater than those afforded their civilian counterparts. Once again, this is due to the unique situation of military service. Should the UCMJ be modified? I believe it should be routinely be evaluated to be kept current with the prevailing court opinions (Supreme Court Holdings) to make sure military members have access to the most current document possible. Should it be eliminated? Not a chance.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 20 at 2017 8:29 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 20 Jul 2017 20:29:08 -0400

The military requires a separate justice system due to the worldwide nature of our business. Civilian law does not extend to foreign soil and there are some infractions unique to military service (Failure to go, Adultery, Fraternization to name a few). The UCMJ and MCM provide a framework for commanders to maintain discipline and good order.

Response by LTC Jason Mackay made Jul 20 at 2017 10:08 PM

LTC Jason Mackay — Thu, 20 Jul 2017 22:08:32 -0400

No, the UCMJ is a Commander's most powerful tool in maintaining good order and discipline. Civilian laws are for people that are simply far less accountable because there is less to be lost. Military members have a totally different environment, norms and conditions they operate in. Sorry there it is. Let the butt hurt begin.

Response by CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 21 at 2017 1:13 PM

CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 21 Jul 2017 13:13:24 -0400

No. Revise and update UCMJ as required definitely. Different military society and standards of conduct requires a different set of laws. Many punitive articles have no civil law to cover. Example - missing a movement, unauthorized absence, disrespect, and countless others.

Response by SGT David T. made Jul 25 at 2017 2:41 PM

SGT David T. — Tue, 25 Jul 2017 14:41:23 -0400

I think if there is an applicable Federal law that already covers an offense, then the UCMJ article is redundant. I think that only purely military offenses should be included and let everything else be handled by civilian courts. Another modification I would is remove anything that is ambiguous such as Article 134. If the offense is not described by law in a clear and precise manner, then it shouldn't be an offense at all.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 25 at 2017 2:55 PM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 25 Jul 2017 14:55:48 -0400

Simply, review, support and defend Commands responsibility & integrate battlefield issues the rule of law cannot proceed. "Ask no more for your pay, and do no many no evil" Basic. Each will live with the woulds, questions and faith of war and garrison set by the actions, tones and examples of our professional services.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 24 at 2019 6:22 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 24 Apr 2019 18:22:27 -0400

The UCMJ is part of the backbone of the military! I wen't to basic and do you know what one of the first things they told me? (excluding front lean and rest position) You are now under UCMJ law. It is separate even though there are laws that are duplicate because we deal with our own. And the way I look at it we can keep it out of the news easier so that they public still trusts the military overall.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 27 at 2019 9:46 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 27 Apr 2019 21:46:50 -0400

It was just updated 1 Jan 19. The military has its own code and tribunals for a reason. Military has jurisdiction over military. US attorneys have jurisdiction over civilians. The two are not the same.