Posted on 04/20/2010 2:27:18 PM PDT by jessduntno
SAN DIEGO - A Camp Pendleton Marine has removed his Facebook page after his comments fueled a free-speech debate about whether troops are allowed to criticize President Barack Obama’s policies while serving in the military.
Sgt. Gary Stein said he was asked by his superiors to review the Pentagon’s directive on political activities after he criticized Obama’s health care reform efforts and then was asked this week to talk about his views on the MSNBC cable TV channel.
Stein said his supervisor told him of his right to an attorney about the matter. He said he decided to close his Facebook page and review his military code obligations. He also contacted private attorneys who told him he had done nothing wrong.
- snip -
Former Marine Corps attorney Patrick Callahan, who now specializes in military law as a civilian lawyer in Texas, said the Pentagon’s directive is aimed at preventing military members from appearing as if they are trying to thwart the public process or plot a coup.
"There are restrictions on time, place and manner. For instance, service members can’t go to political rallies in uniform," Callahan said.
But he added: "I have never seen the military go after a junior service member for making disparaging remarks about any politician."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.bostonherald.com ...
But, so long as you don't issue such opinion as an official opinion, disciplinary actions are RARELY ever taken.
“But, so long as you don’t issue such opinion as an official opinion, disciplinary actions are RARELY ever taken.”
You seem to be in agreement with Counsel. From the article:
“There are restrictions on time, place and manner. For instance, service members can’t go to political rallies in uniform,” Callahan said.
But he added: “I have never seen the military go after a junior service member for making disparaging remarks about any politician.”
Right. If a member of the military wants to go online and call Osama a punk assed bitch, then that should be OK.
Now if he posts online that everybody should vote for Voldemort and kickout the punk assed bitch currently in office, well, that’s probably not allowed.
Their is a DoD directive that gives explicit permission for service members to express opinions in letters to the editors. They may identify themselves and the rank that they hold so long as they're clear that their remarks are not being made in an official capacity. I would think that a Facebook page is very far removed from a letter-to-the-editor, IMHO.
"I would think that a Facebook page is not very far removed from a letter-to-the-editor, IMHO.
The death of free speech....
Keep in mind, it the US Military, not the US Boy Scouts. There is no "free speech" in the military. There is only speech allowed under the UCMJ and Presidential directive and DoD or Service Branch policies that are developed from the UCMJ and those directives.
As I recall back when Nixon was president it was OK for active duty army personel to have anti Nixon bumper stickes and say things against the then sitting president.
But then he was White.
Yep...
“If you want total security, go to prison. There you’re fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. The only thing lacking is freedom.” - Ike
I know it is not the Boy Scouts.....however, one should have the right to free speech....they are American Citizens....and, I think it is gauranteed....
I joined this group the other day and it’s been back up for awhile. There are over 2800 folks on there so far.
“I joined this group the other day and it’s been back up for awhile. There are over 2800 folks on there so far.”
This is one that I would like to see go viral...it’s part of the stepped up attack on conservatism and they want to shut it down in the military...for obvious reasons, I think...they don’t want too many of those GD “oath keepers” around...
It should be OK, but it's not. It's considered disrespect to the Chain of Command to criticize the president, whether he deserves it or not. I know this firsthand, having served during Klinton's first term. I was warned a time or three to keep my big mouth shut.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
Freedom of movement, freedom of assembly, 4th and some 5th Amendment guarantees (and others) are ALL either vacated or limited when serving in the US Armed Forces.
You can't have service members publicly criticizing this or any Commander-in-Chief. It undermines authority and discipline.
You can't have service members publicly criticizing this or any Commander-in-Chief. It undermines authority and discipline.
I believe enlisted and officers are treated differently in this regard. Officers can be subject to UCMJ for "speaking out" but I don't think enlisted can. Of course, exceptions exist for everything but generally speaking enlisted don't have much to worry about.
There are some distinctions in DoD policy made between officer and enlisted, but they are - as a practical matter - fairly insignificant distinctions. The relevant DoD Directive DoD is 1344.10. Essentially, neither enlisted nor officer is allowed to use "contemptuous words" about with respect to political speech, but officers are explicitly forbidden from using such words.
Of course, the UCMJ (which applies fully to ally US service members) also prohibits "contempt towards an official" in Article 88. Official is defined fairly broadly when using the language, "..President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct....
Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)
ART. 88 - CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS
Any commissioned officer (italics mine) who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
Yes that's true, good catch. I should have included Art 134. Of course, any enlisted man would be charged under with this specification for such a similar offense, as well as Art 92, for disobeying the DoD directive in this matter. But, the definition of "official" would be drawn from Art. 88, FWIW.
When the UCMJ was drafted after the conclusion of WWII (and it's predecessor, the Articles of War back during the Founding), I'm sure no one imagined an opportunity for an enlisted man or an NCO to show contempt towards an official, because an enlisted man or NCO would have virtually no interaction with an official. Of course, officers frequently would. Clearly, the internet and mass media has changed all that.
Art. 80, which specifies contemptuous behavior by enlisted men of the superiors does not include reference to the President or other civilian authorities, but it would be a mistake to read that as a license for enlisted men to make contemptuous remarks about the CIC, or other civilian leaders. DoD 1344.10, and several other directives codifies that contemptuous language by enlisted men is not permissible, FWIW.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.