Contempt Toward Officials, Disrespect Toward Superior Commissioned Officer, Willfully Disobeying Superior Commissioned Officer, and Insubordinate Conduct (UCMJ Articles 88-91) – Military Defense Lawyer

Military Contempt Toward Officials, Disloyal Statements, Disrespect Toward Superior Commissioned Officer, Willfully Disobeying Superior Commissioned Officer, and Insubordinate Conduct Allegations Can be Very Serious and Can Threaten Your Military Career and Future.

When military members are accused of these offenses, they can face a variety of military adverse actions and disciplinary actions, to include court-martial trial. If you are a military member facing this allegation, you need a strong military defense lawyer as your advocate. Attorney Richard V. Stevens is a civilian court-martial defense lawyer and military defense lawyer. He began handling military cases in 1995 and he has been handling military cases for over 30 years. Attorney Stevens, and the military defense law firm he founded, are here to provide you with the zealous defense you are seeking to protect you from the potential consequences of this military criminal claim.

Military Contempt Toward Officials Cases (UCMJ Article 88)

Military contempt toward officials allegations are charged under Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 88. This military offense covers the following:

A military commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present.

For this alleged military offense, it is immaterial whether the words are used against the official in an official or private capacity. If not personally contemptuous, adverse criticism of one of the officials or legislatures named in the article in the course of a political discussion, even though emphatically expressed, may not be charged as a violation of the article. Similarly, expressions of opinion made in a purely private conversation should not ordinarily be charged. Giving broad circulation to a written publication containing contemptuous words of the kind made punishable by this article, or the utterance of contemptuous words of this kind in the presence of military subordinates, aggravates the offense. The truth or falsity of the statements is immaterial.”

Particularly given the divisive nature of the the current political environment, we have seen an increase in claims that military members have been contemptuous toward officials. That said, military members do still enjoy First Amendment rights in certain circumstances, and Article 88 clearly states that “expressions of opinion made in a purely private conversation should not ordinarily be charged.” So, the particular facts and circumstances of these cases are very important.

Military Disloyal Statements Cases (UCMJ Article 134)

These military offenses are charged under Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 134, and cover the following:

A military member who makes a certain statement to another person and that statement is disloyal to the United States.

Examples of this offense include praising the enemy, attacking the war aims of the United States, or denouncing our form of government with the intent to promote disloyalty or disaffection among members of the armed Services. A declaration of personal belief can amount to a disloyal statement if it disavows allegiance owed to the United States by the declarant. The disloyalty involved for this offense must be to the United States as a political entity and not merely to a department or other agency that is a part of its administration.

Military Disrespect Toward Superior Commissioned Officer; Assault of Superior Commissioned Officer Cases (UCMJ Article 89)

Military disrespect toward, or assault of, a superior commissioned officer allegations are charged under Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 89. This military offense covers the following:

(a) DISRESPECT — A military member who behaves with disrespect toward that person’s superior commissioned officer;
(b) ASSAULT — A military member who strikes that person’s superior commissioned officer or draws or lifts up any weapon or offers any violence against that officer while the officer is in the execution of the officer’s office;
(1) if the offense is committed in time of war, shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct; and
(2) if the offense is committed at any other time, shall be punished by such punishment, other than death, as a courtmartial may direct.

Military Willfully Disobeying Superior Commissioned Officer Cases (UCMJ Article 90)

Military willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer allegations are charged under Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 90. This military offense covers the following:

A military member who willfully disobeys a lawful command of that person’s superior commissioned officer;
(1) if the offense is committed in time of war, shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct; and
(2) if the offense is committed at any other time, shall be punished by such punishment, other than death, as a courtmartial may direct.

As with failure to obey orders allegations (UCMJ Article 92), the LAWFULNESS of an order is a question of law to be determined by the military judge.

Military Insubordinate Conduct Toward a Warrant Officer, Noncommissioned Officer (NCO), or Petty Officer Cases (UCMJ Article 91)

This alleged offense is charged under Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 91, and covers the following:

A military officer or enlisted member who —
(1) strikes or assaults a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer, while that officer is in the execution of his office;
(2) willfully disobeys the lawful order of a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer; or
(3) treats with contempt or is disrespectful in language or deportment toward a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer, while that officer is in the execution of his office.

Over our many years of military law practice, our civilian court-martial defense lawyers have defended numerous military cases alleging these types of offenses, including in combat zones. Depending on the factual scenario alleged, these cases can be complicated and can be quite serious.

Handling these serious military cases requires the expertise of a skilled military defense lawyer. A military member accused of these offenses could face extreme jeopardy – possible federal criminal conviction, lengthy jail terms, dishonorable discharge or dismissal, and a variety of other legal, professional, personal, and family consequences.

An experienced and aggressive defense attorney is absolutely vital in these military cases.

Civilian court-martial defense attorney Richard V. Stevens is a civilian criminal defense attorney and former active duty military JAG lawyer who exclusively practices military law and defends military members stationed around the world who are facing military trials, discipline and investigations. If you’re facing these military allegations, don’t hesitate to seek the legal help you’re going to need. For a free initial case consultation, please contact us.

No attorney can guarantee the outcome you seek in your military case. What we can promise is that we will apply our decades of experience to the defense of your military case. This includes our extensive experience in military law, military regulations, military investigations, military disciplinary actions, military adverse actions, and/or military court-martial trials and cases.

Client Testimonials and Reviews

Please see Client Testimonials and Client Reviews for Attorney Richard V. Stevens.

Law Firm Social Media Accounts

Please find updates on our law firm and our cases on our social media:
Our Blog
Successful Case Defenses Through 2025
Twitter X
Facebook
Instagram