We have a moral, ethical and professional responsibility to respectfully refuse to obey orders to enforce unconstitutional laws. We, as police officers, cannot legally, morally or ethically arrest someone in an effort to enforce an unconstitutional law.

Not only should an unlawful order not be obeyed, obeying such an order can result in criminal prosecution. Military courts have long held that military members are accountable for their actions even while following orders.

Penalties for Failure to Obey an Order The penalties for violating or failing to obey a lawful general order or regulation include: Dishonorable discharge; Forfeiture of pay and allowances; and/or. No more than 2 years of confinement.

German soldiers (Bundeswehr) are not only allowed, but obligated, to disobey any order they think would violate human dignity. This point is so heavily emphasized in basic training that a lot of new recruits are sworn into the Service at the castle where Hitler was nearly assassinated.

A lawful order is any order given by a superior officer. The law, Article 91, protects and upholds the authority of an NCO. To answer your first question: Any Officer, NCO, Petty Officer, Warrant Officer or person in a position of authority (ie, SFS) can give lawful orders.

The military cannot confiscate private property without probable cause or a warrant. This would be a violation of the Soldier’s Fourth Amendment rights. The NCO can order the Soldiers not turn on their phones during duty hours or to not have their phones out during duty hours, except for an emergency.

Article 92 defines disobeying a direct order as three types of offenses – violations or failures to obey lawful general orders or regulations, failures to obey other lawful orders, and dereliction of duty.

Article 134: General Article This article of the Uniform Code of Military Justice is a catch-all for offenses that are not spelled out elsewhere. It covers all conduct that could bring discredit upon the armed forces that are not capital offenses.

Defining Article 99 of the UCMJ Article 99 covers nine unique charges, each with its own set of elements which must be proven. Running away; Shamefully abandoning, surrendering, or delivering up command; Endangering safety of a command, unit, place, ship or military property; Casting away arms or ammunition.

Under Article 31 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ,) if a person on active duty with the U.S. military is suspected of committing a criminal offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, they have the following rights: THE RIGHT to remain silent; that means to say nothing at all.

What Is Article 90 of the UCMJ? Any service member who is found guilty of willfully disobeying, striking or threatening his superior commissioned officer while said officer is executing the orders of his or her command will be subject to punishment under Article 90 of the UCMJ.

Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the offense of assault can be committed by one of three ways – offer, attempt, or by battery. An assault by offer places another person in reasonable apprehension of force. The act or omission can be intentional or culpably negligent.

An Article 32 hearing is a proceeding under the United States Uniform Code of Military Justice, similar to that of a preliminary hearing in civilian law. Offenders in the US military may face non-judicial punishment, a summary court-martial, special court-martial, general court-martial, or administrative separation.

(Article 93, UCMJ, proscribes cruelty toward, or oppression or maltreatment of, any person subject to an accused’s orders; and the elements of this general intent offense are: (1) that a certain person was subject to the orders of the accused; and (2) that the accused was cruel toward, or oppressed, or maltreated that …

Once the hearing is over, the investigating officer will give their written report of the Article 32 hearing to the commanding officer/general. The commander will then be able to decide whether your case should proceed to a General Court Martial.

The maximum punishment that can be imposed by a summary court-martial includes: Confinement (or hard labor without confinement) for 30 days.

The elements of false official statement under Article 107, UCMJ are: That the accused signed a certain official document or made a certain official statement; That the false document or statement was made with the intent to deceive.

Article 80 reads that a crime must go beyond “mere preparation and tending.” In other words, you cannot be convicted of an Article 80 offense simply by arranging or plotting a crime. There must be a substantial step towards the commission of the offense before you can be convicted of violating Article 80 of the UCMJ.

Article 87 of the UCMJ states a service member is subject to prosecution if they, through neglect or design, miss the movement of a ship, aircraft, or unit with which the person is required in the course of duty. the accused knew of the prospective movement of the ship, aircraft, or unit; and.

A POW must resist, avoid, or evade, even when physically and mentally coerced, all enemy efforts to secure statements or actions that may further the enemy’s cause.

Except for individuals attached to or embarked on a vessel, service members have the right to refuse nonjudicial punishment. However refusal of NJP will normally not result in the dismissal of charges, in fact a commanding officer can still refer the charges to a court-martial.

Courts-martial convictions are typically considered “felony convictions” if the maximum permissible punishment for the offense is one year or more in military prison. It doesn’t matter what sentence is imposed, it is based on the maximum punishment the court-martial is able to impose.

Absent a declaration of martial law, United States civilians cannot be prosecuted under a system of military law (Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1) (1957) (holding unconstitutional the trial by military court of a civilian woman for murdering her husband in the military).

You’re not supposed to wear your military uniform in a context in which it may show discredit to the service. Being a defendant in a civilian case arguably could bring discredit, especially if some sort of fraud were proven.

Military tribunals in the United States are military courts designed to try members of enemy forces during wartime, operating outside the scope of conventional criminal and civil proceedings. The judges are military officers and fulfill the role of jurors. Military tribunals are distinct from courts-martial.

Federal Law Treason is the only crime defined in the U.S. Constitution. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

Although the legal justifications for the trials and their procedural innovations were controversial at the time, the Nuremberg trials are now regarded as a milestone toward the establishment of a permanent international court, and an important precedent for dealing with later instances of genocide and other crimes …

The Belmont Report was written in response to the infamous Tuskegee Syphilis Study, in which African Americans with syphilis were lied to and denied treatment for more than 40 years. Many people died as a result, infected others with the disease, and passed congenital syphilis onto their children.