UCMJ Article 134 – Disloyal Statements

This enumerated offense under Article 134 punishes service members who make statements that show disloyalty toward the United States with the intent to promote disaffection or undermine loyalty to the nation. Because the armed forces depend on allegiance, discipline, and unity, disloyal speech can damage morale, weaken trust, and bring discredit upon the service.

This article is not intended to stifle free expression broadly. It applies to statements that cross the line into disloyalty — such as urging desertion, supporting enemies, or advocating refusal to serve.

Key Elements

The prosecution must prove:

  1. That the accused made a certain statement or statements.
  2. That the statements were disloyal to the United States.
  3. That the statements were wrongful.
  4. That, under the circumstances, the conduct was prejudicial to good order and discipline or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.

Scope and Application

This offense may include:

  • Advocating desertion or disobedience of lawful orders.
  • Expressing sympathy with or support for enemies of the United States.
  • Statements intended to incite disloyalty or weaken allegiance among other service members.
  • Distributing writings, posts, or communications that encourage disaffection.

It does not punish mere criticism of military policy or leadership if expressed lawfully and without disloyal intent.

Punishment

  • Maximum punishment: Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for up to 3 years.

Defenses

Possible defenses include:

  • Freedom of expression: Protected speech that does not rise to disloyalty.
  • No intent: If the statements were not made with wrongful purpose or were misunderstood.
  • Truthful criticism: Lawful commentary, even if unfavorable, may not qualify.
  • Insufficient proof: If the government cannot prove disloyal content or context.

Examples

If a soldier urges others to refuse deployment orders and support enemies, Article 134 applies. If a Marine posts statements online praising hostile forces and encouraging disobedience, it qualifies. If an airman circulates writings advocating desertion, it is punishable. Conversely, if a sailor lawfully voices disagreement with policy in private without disloyal intent, it may not be wrongful.

Conclusion

Article 134 disloyal statements charges protect the integrity of the armed forces by punishing speech that directly undermines loyalty to the United States. The offense draws a careful distinction between wrongful disloyalty and lawful criticism, preserving both military discipline and constitutional values.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What makes a statement “disloyal” under Article 134?
A statement is disloyal if it shows allegiance to enemies, promotes desertion, or encourages disobedience to lawful authority. The key is intent to undermine loyalty or discipline, not mere dissatisfaction.

2. Does this offense punish free speech?
Only when speech is disloyal, wrongful, and harmful to discipline or the reputation of the armed forces. Protected speech under the First Amendment is not criminalized. Courts balance constitutional rights with military necessity.

3. What is the maximum punishment for disloyal statements?
Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for up to 3 years. The penalty reflects the seriousness of undermining trust and loyalty in the armed forces.

4. Can criticism of leadership be punished as disloyal?
Not usually. Criticism expressed lawfully, without advocating disobedience or enemy support, is not disloyal. Wrongful intent distinguishes criminal misconduct from free expression.

5. What if the accused did not intend the words to be disloyal?
Intent is crucial. If the accused spoke carelessly or was misunderstood, liability may not apply. The government must prove wrongful intent beyond a reasonable doubt.

6. Can online statements or social media posts qualify?
Yes. Disloyalty expressed digitally is punishable like spoken words. Social media increases visibility and impact, making enforcement more significant.

7. How does this offense differ from mutiny or sedition?
Mutiny and sedition involve collective action to overthrow authority. Disloyal statements involve speech alone, without organizing rebellion. Both threaten discipline but in different ways.

8. Does the context of war make a difference?
Yes. Disloyalty during wartime may be treated more severely, especially if it supports enemies or undermines operations. Courts-martial weigh the circumstances carefully.

9. Can disloyal statements overlap with other charges?
Yes. Depending on the content, they may overlap with mutiny, sedition, or even aiding the enemy. Prosecutors may charge multiple articles for the same conduct.

10. Why does the military criminalize disloyal statements?
Because loyalty and unity are essential for mission success. Disloyal speech erodes cohesion, damages morale, and discredits the armed forces. Strict enforcement preserves discipline and national security.

Sources

  • Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 934, Article 134 (Disloyal Statements)
  • Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2024 edition)
  • Army Regulation 27-10, Military Justice
  • Navy JAGMAN (Judge Advocate General’s Manual) § 0166
  • Air Force Instruction 51-201, Administration of Military Justice
  • Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, United States v. Howe, 37 C.M.R. 429 (1967)
  • Military Attorney Joseph L. Jordan, Articles of the UCMJ web page

This content is for informational purposes only. If you are facing issues related to Article 134 or any other UCMJ provision, you should consult a qualified military attorney.

Related:

  1. UCMJ Article 87 – Missing Movement UCMJ Article 87 criminalizes the act of missing the movement of a ship, aircraft, or unit with which a service member is required to move. Unlike AWOL or desertion, Article 87 applies specifically to situations where a movement has been...
  2. UCMJ Article 133 – Conduct Unbecoming an Officer and Gentleman UCMJ Article 133 criminalizes conduct by commissioned officers, cadets, or midshipmen that dishonors or disgraces them personally, or seriously compromises their standing as officers. The article is intentionally broad, designed to uphold the integrity and character expected of military leaders....
  3. UCMJ Article 106 – Spies UCMJ Article 106 criminalizes acts of spying against the United States in time of war. A spy is someone who, without lawful authority and under false pretenses, collects or attempts to collect information with the intent of communicating it to...
  4. UCMJ Article 130 – Housebreaking UCMJ Article 130 criminalizes housebreaking, which is the unlawful entry of a building or structure with intent to commit a criminal offense inside. Unlike burglary under Article 129, housebreaking does not require nighttime entry or that the structure be a...
  5. UCMJ Article 134 – Fleeing the Scene of an Accident Under Article 134, a service member who is involved in an accident and wrongfully leaves the scene without fulfilling legal responsibilities can be punished for fleeing the scene of an accident. The rule applies whether the accident involves government or...
  6. UCMJ Article 134 – False or Unauthorized Pass Offenses Under Article 134, service members can be punished for the wrongful making, altering, selling, or use of passes that grant liberty, leave, or access to restricted areas. A “pass” includes liberty passes, leave authorizations, and similar official documents. Because the...
  7. UCMJ Article 104 – Aiding the Enemy UCMJ Article 104 criminalizes any act of providing aid, comfort, or intelligence to the enemy. This provision is one of the most serious in military law because it addresses direct betrayal of the United States in times of armed conflict....
  8. UCMJ Article 93 – Cruelty and Maltreatment UCMJ Article 93 criminalizes cruelty, oppression, or maltreatment of any person subject to a service member’s orders. This provision is not limited to physical abuse. It covers acts of abuse of authority, whether through physical harm, threats, humiliation, harassment, or...
  9. UCMJ Article 134 – The General Article UCMJ Article 134, known as the “General Article,” is a catch-all provision that criminalizes a wide range of misconduct not specifically addressed in other articles of the UCMJ. It punishes behavior that is prejudicial to good order and discipline in...
  10. UCMJ Article 88 – Contempt Toward Officials UCMJ Article 88 makes it a crime for a commissioned officer to use contemptuous words against certain government officials. Specifically, it applies to contempt directed at the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a...
  11. UCMJ Article 134 – Bigamy Bigamy is one of the enumerated offenses under UCMJ Article 134, which punishes misconduct that is prejudicial to good order and discipline or that brings discredit upon the armed forces. Bigamy occurs when a service member, while already married, marries...
  12. UCMJ Article 105 – Misconduct as a Prisoner UCMJ Article 105 punishes service members who, while in the hands of the enemy as prisoners of war, engage in misconduct that harms the United States or provides aid to the enemy. Unlike ordinary prisoner discipline issues, this article targets...
  13. UCMJ Article 134 – Obstructing Justice This enumerated offense under Article 134 punishes service members who wrongfully impede, interfere with, or obstruct the due administration of justice. The offense includes actions that delay, prevent, or corrupt investigations, judicial proceedings, or disciplinary processes. Because the military justice...
  14. UCMJ Article 134 – Threat or Hoax Designed or Intended to Cause Panic or Public Fear This enumerated offense under Article 134 punishes service members who create or spread false threats, hoaxes, or warnings with the intent to cause panic, fear, or disruption. The military treats these acts as serious misconduct because they undermine discipline, disrupt...
  15. UCMJ Article 81 – Conspiracy UCMJ Article 81 establishes liability for conspiracy. It criminalizes the agreement between two or more persons to commit an offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, provided that at least one of the conspirators performs an overt act to...