UCMJ Article 134 – Threat Communicating

This enumerated offense under Article 134 punishes service members who wrongfully communicate a threat to injure another person, their property, or a third party. Discipline in the armed forces requires trust, respect, and order, and threatening language undermines that foundation. Unlike mere profanity or insults, a punishable threat is one that a reasonable person would interpret as a serious expression of intent to cause harm.

This article is closely related to Article 115 (communicating threats in the context of duress or hoax) but applies broadly to wrongful threats in military life, whether directed at superiors, subordinates, peers, or civilians.

Key Elements

The prosecution must prove:

  1. That the accused communicated certain language expressing a threat.
  2. That the threat was wrongful.
  3. That the threat was to injure another person, their property, or someone else.
  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 applies to:

  • Verbal threats to physically harm another service member.
  • Written or electronic threats (letters, texts, emails, social media).
  • Threats directed at military or civilian property, such as threatening to burn a vehicle.
  • Threats intended to intimidate, control, or retaliate.

It does not punish idle talk, jokes, or exaggerations that no reasonable person would view as genuine threats.

Punishment

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

Defenses

Possible defenses include:

  • No wrongful intent: If the accused did not intend the words as a real threat.
  • Not a true threat: If the statement was obviously a joke or exaggeration.
  • Privilege: Certain communications in lawful contexts (such as training scenarios) may not be wrongful.
  • Insufficient proof: If the government cannot prove the accused made or intended the threat.

Examples

If a soldier tells a fellow service member, “I’ll beat you up after duty,” intending it as a real threat, Article 134 applies. If a Marine sends threatening texts to destroy a peer’s car, it qualifies. If an airman emails threats of violence to a commander, it is punishable. By contrast, if a sailor jokingly says, “I’ll kill you for taking the last donut,” and no one reasonably interprets it as serious, it may not qualify.

Conclusion

Article 134 threat communicating charges preserve order and professionalism in the military by deterring intimidation and violence through words. The rule distinguishes between idle speech and true threats, ensuring fairness while holding service members accountable for wrongful intimidation.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What makes a threat punishable under Article 134?
A threat must be wrongful, intended seriously, and capable of being understood as an expression of intent to cause harm. Idle words, jokes, or exaggerations are not usually punishable. The focus is on whether a reasonable person would view it as serious.

2. Does the threat have to be carried out?
No. The offense is complete once the threat is communicated. Whether or not the accused intended to follow through is less important than the wrongful act of intimidation. The law punishes the risk created by threats themselves.

3. Can threats be communicated electronically?
Yes. Texts, emails, social media posts, and other electronic communications are covered. The format does not matter; the wrongful communication of a threat is the offense.

4. What is the maximum punishment?
Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for up to 3 years. The severity reflects the disruptive and intimidating nature of threats in military life.

5. How is this offense different from disorderly conduct?
Disorderly conduct punishes disruptive but non-threatening behavior. Threat communicating specifically targets wrongful intimidation through words. The distinction lies in whether actual threats of harm were made.

6. What if the accused says they were “just joking”?
If a reasonable person would not take the statement seriously, it may not be wrongful. However, if the words appeared serious in context, claiming a joke may not be a valid defense. Courts examine intent and perception.

7. Can property threats be included?
Yes. Threatening to destroy or damage property (such as a car, home, or equipment) qualifies. The threat does not need to be against a person’s body.

8. Does rank matter in threat cases?
Yes. Threats against superiors can aggravate punishment, while threats toward subordinates may also involve abuse of authority. Rank and relationship influence how seriously the offense is treated.

9. What if alcohol or stress influenced the threat?
Being drunk or stressed does not excuse misconduct. Threats made under intoxication or pressure are still wrongful. These factors may affect sentencing but not guilt.

10. Why does the military criminalize threats so strictly?
Because threats undermine cohesion, morale, and trust. Even without violence, intimidation damages discipline and unit readiness. Strict enforcement deters misconduct and protects all members of the armed forces.

Sources

  • Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 934, Article 134 (Communicating a Threat)
  • 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. Phillips, 42 M.J. 127 (1995)
  • 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 126 – Arson UCMJ Article 126 criminalizes the act of willfully and maliciously burning or setting fire to property. The article distinguishes between burning property belonging to the United States and property belonging to another person. Arson is treated as a serious offense...
  2. UCMJ Article 114 – Dueling UCMJ Article 114 prohibits service members from engaging in dueling, provoking or accepting a challenge to duel, or acting as a second in arranging a duel. Dueling refers to a prearranged combat between two people, usually with deadly weapons, to...
  3. UCMJ Article 120c – Other Sexual Misconduct UCMJ Article 120c criminalizes forms of sexual misconduct not specifically covered under Articles 120 or 120b. It was created to ensure that acts such as indecent exposure, voyeurism, and indecent visual recording are addressed under military law. This article reflects...
  4. UCMJ Article 134 – Wrongful Refusal to Testify This enumerated offense under Article 134 punishes a service member who wrongfully refuses to testify when lawfully required to do so. The integrity of the military justice system depends on witness testimony, and refusal to testify can obstruct investigations, delay...
  5. UCMJ Article 102 – Forcing a Safeguard UCMJ Article 102 criminalizes the act of forcing a safeguard. A safeguard is a formal protection or guarantee issued by a commander to protect persons, property, or places from harm by U.S. military forces. Safeguards are often written documents, posted...
  6. UCMJ Article 134 – Sentinel or Lookout: Offenses Against or By This enumerated offense under Article 134 punishes misconduct either committed against a sentinel or lookout on duty, or misconduct by a sentinel or lookout who fails to properly perform their duties. Sentinels and lookouts hold critical positions in military security,...
  7. UCMJ Article 125 – Sodomy UCMJ Article 125 historically criminalized sodomy, defined as unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex, or with an animal. For decades, the article was broadly applied to both consensual and non-consensual acts. However, significant changes...
  8. UCMJ Article 120 UCMJ Article 120 addresses sexual assault and related sexual misconduct committed by service members. It is one of the most comprehensive and strictly enforced articles in the UCMJ, reflecting the military’s zero-tolerance stance on sexual violence. The article criminalizes rape,...
  9. 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...
  10. UCMJ Article 116 – Riot or Breach of Peace UCMJ Article 116 punishes service members who take part in a riot or who cause a disturbance that breaches the peace. Discipline and order are the backbone of military effectiveness, and collective disorder or violent conduct threatens not only the...
  11. UCMJ Article 108 – Damage, Wrongful Disposition, Sale, Loss or Destruction of U.S. Military Property UCMJ Article 108 addresses misconduct involving U.S. military property. The article criminalizes damaging, selling, destroying, misusing, or losing military property, whether through negligence or intentional acts. Because military property belongs to the United States and is essential for readiness, accountability...
  12. UCMJ Article 107 – Making False Official Statements UCMJ Article 107 punishes service members who knowingly make false official statements or entries, or who sign official documents knowing the information is false. Military justice depends on accuracy and honesty in official matters. Any deliberate falsehood in official documents,...
  13. UCMJ Article 134 – Restriction Breaking Restriction breaking is an enumerated offense under Article 134 that punishes service members who unlawfully break restriction imposed by lawful authority. Restriction is a form of non-judicial punishment, pretrial restraint, or administrative control that limits a service member’s movements to...
  14. UCMJ Article 127 – Extortion UCMJ Article 127 punishes extortion, which is the wrongful act of obtaining something of value from another by threats. Extortion undermines trust, order, and discipline by allowing one person to use intimidation for personal gain. Because the military environment demands...
  15. 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....