The 1st Amendment and the US military

SSG Thomas Brousseau — Thu, 04 Jun 2015 15:51:09 -0400

Should the American military be afforded the same protections under the 1st ammendment as do American citizens?

Response by SFC Stephen King made Jun 4 at 2015 3:52 PM

SFC Stephen King — Thu, 04 Jun 2015 15:52:49 -0400

This is a core value and belief that our great nation was founded on.

Once you enlist, you are covered under the UCMJ. Uniform Code of Military Justice.

The UCMJ is not the Constitution, but you do give up some rights, " in order to maintain, good order and discipline, " in the military. You have additional rights under the UCMJ that you do not have in Civilian life also.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 4 at 2015 3:53 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 04 Jun 2015 15:53:46 -0400

I think the protections forwarded to members are correct. When on active orders, they are agents of the government &, therefore, under restrictions about speaking too harshly about said government. While they may speak out privately, they should not put forth a message that they lean one way or another on any particular issue (unless it is necessary for the good of the service). It is in the best interest that active members remain as publicly neutral as possible.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 4 at 2015 3:56 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 04 Jun 2015 15:56:05 -0400

No. The military is subordinate to civilian authority, and we need an enforcement mechanism for punishing speech harmful to operational security, national interests, and good order and discipline.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 4 at 2015 4:03 PM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 04 Jun 2015 16:03:39 -0400

We have the same protections under the Constitution. We accept an additional responsibility of representing the country when in uniform, which may not completely align with our personal opinions. The positive reputation that we strive to achieve and maintain with the American people means we have to do our best to appear impartial and be the protectors of all, not just those who we share philosophical viewpoints with. This includes not saying anything that might damage the trust in the profession of arms we seek to build. Frustrating? Yes. This is but one aspect of military service that sets us apart from citizens who have never served and shouldered that responsibility.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 4 at 2015 4:17 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 04 Jun 2015 16:17:08 -0400

We are afforded the same protections under the Constitution as all citizens... unless we are in uniform or acting in an official capacity. Then the subordinate relationship between elected leaders and uniformed servicemembers comes into play.
I have an opinion.
I can vote.
I can disagree with a policy, so long as I don't make that disagreement a personal one with an elected or appointed official.
I can assemble - just not in uniform.
I can observe any religion I choose.

My speech is not abridged, I just have to be smart about when and where I exercise that right.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Jun 4 at 2015 6:42 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Thu, 04 Jun 2015 18:42:48 -0400

Freedom of X, does not mean Freedom FROM Y.

Response by CPT Pedro Meza made Sep 29 at 2015 12:24 PM

CPT Pedro Meza — Tue, 29 Sep 2015 12:24:12 -0400

In 1974, my Drill Instructor told me He was my 1st Amendment, as well as my Mother, and that he would see to that I get to bed on time, as well as eat my veggies; there is no need to change that!

Response by CDR Michael Goldschmidt made Feb 7 at 2016 8:15 AM

CDR Michael Goldschmidt — Sun, 07 Feb 2016 08:15:43 -0500

Constitutionally, does Congress' Art. I, Section 8 power "to make rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval forces" trump the 1st Amendment? Amendment 1 comes later. It would be damned inconvenient to Good Order & Discipline, but "Congress Shall Make No Law" means "Congress Shall Make No Law". What's the Constitutional basis for that? Is it in our oaths somewhere? Maybe it's in the enlisted oath under "according to regulation and the Uniform Code of Military Justice", but not in the Officer oath, which has no such clause?