Posted on 02/28/2025 5:09:47 AM PST by 7thson
I posted yesterday that those that signed the letter demanding Congress investigate the firing of the CJCS, and their insubordinate remarks should be charge with Article 88 of the UCMJ and court-martialed. I received one response that stated that since they are retired, the UCMJ does not apply to them.
Is that true?
And if is not true, that they can be brought up on UCMJ charges, than is that true for all retired personnel?
Retired is to be a civilian again................
My view - they are subject to be recalled back to duty and court-martialed. Once in the service, you are never completely free.
can’t all retired military personnel be recalled to active duty at anytime?
Yes and no.
There IS no true expiration date of our oaths of office, no outprocessing step where you take back your oath.
NOT everyone can or will be recalled, but in general, anyone over the field grade rank of 04 (Major in the Army, AF, Marines, LT in the Navy, etc) can be recalled to active duty.
Back in Desert Storm II, 2003, I worked with a 66 year old psychiatrist who was recalled to AD after nearly 15 years out; another, an orthopedic surgeon who lost his practice, hospital board position, marriage, everything when he was recalled in Desert Storm I 1990.
I’ve never seen nor heard of an enlisted guy being recalled, but I imagine it could and has happened.
Yes
I don't think so, I think it's only 2 or 3 years after you separation.
BTW just because you served the country in the armed forced does not mean you loose your 1st amendment rights for life.
It's a silly notion and insulting to our vets. They, more than anyone have earned the right to say whatever the F they want.
If they call me back they'll really be disappointed.
I thought General officers were never really retired and subject to recall at all times?
I knew a guy who retired as a Major in the USMC on 9/1/01. He was recalled the Wednesday after 9/11.
Bullsh!t. Every retired military person is still subject to the UCMJ in a limited sense; they are on inactive reserve for quite a long time. In that capacity, they can be recalled to active duty and fully prosecuted under the UCMJ.
> I thought General officers were never really retired … <
If I’m not mistaken, that only applies to 5-star generals and admirals. And that’s so they can continue to have a government-supplied office, a couple of military aides, and active-duty pay.
Enlisted personnel whose contract is over? No.
Officers commissioned by the President? Absolutely.
That makes sense. Thanks for updating me.
Retirees do not need to be called back to Active Duty to face charges under the UCMJ:
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/LSB/LSB10945
The Supreme Court has not yet specifically ruled on the military status of retired servicemembers, though it has approvingly noted that they remain part of the Armed Forces and subject to the UCMJ. Federal appellate courts (e.g., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces [CAAF]), however, have consistently held that military retirees possess a military status that makes them subject to military law. In finding such status, courts have highlighted several connections between retired servicemembers and the military: they can be recalled to active duty and, accordingly, serve as a potential source of supplementary personnel; they are entitled to receive special pay and other benefits from the military, which are viewed, at least in part, as retainer conferrals; and they have the right to wear their uniforms and be referred to according to their rank (in certain circumstances).
The U.S. Court of Military Appeals (now the CAAF) articulated a widely adopted position in 1958 in United States v. Hooper: [Those] on the retired list are not mere pensioners in any sense of the word. They form a vital segment of our national defense for their experience and mature judgment are relied upon heavily in times of emergency. The salaries they receive are not solely recompense for past services, but a means devised by Congress to assure their availability and preparedness in future contingencies. This preparedness depends as much upon their continued responsiveness to discipline as upon their continued state of physical health. Certainly, one who is authorized to wear the uniform of his country, to use the title of his grade, who is looked upon as a model of the military way of life, and who receives a salary to assure his availability, is a part of the land or naval forces.
Non-retirees cannot be called back to Active Duty to face charges under the UCMJ unless they're in the Selective Reserve or Individual Ready Reserve. (They would face charges in local, state, or Federal courts). One's initial service commitment is eight years which can be a combination of Active Duty, Selective Reserve, or Individual Ready Reserve. For example, those who do one tour ("four and out"), if they don't join the Selective Reserve, they're placed in the Individual Ready Reserve for four years.
If they call me back they’ll really be disappointed.
_____________________________
Me too at 80 years, but I still retain the fire in my belly for my country that I served for over thirty years. It’s the fine print of the government enlistment contract that surprises so many AFTER signing on the doted line.
The UCMJ applies to certain retirees, particularly those who have served more than 20 years but less than 30 and receive retirement pay, as they can be recalled to active duty without their consent in times of war or national emergency. However, retirees who have served 30 years or more are transferred to the Regular Retired List and are no longer subject to the UCMJ.
There are ongoing legal challenges to the rules that allow certain retirees to be court-martialed, which could have significant implications for military veterans.
References Follow:
From AR 27-10, Military Justice:
a) Retired Soldiers should not engage in personal or professional activities that are incompatible with the standards of conduct expected of active duty personnel.
b) Retired members of a regular component of the Armed Forces who are entitled to pay are subject to the provisions of the UCMJ. Retired Soldiers are subject to the UCMJ and may be tried by court-martial for violations of the UCMJ that occurred while they were on active duty or while in a retired status.
Department of the Army policy provides that Retired Soldiers subject to the UCMJ will not be tried for any offense by any courts-martial unless extraordinary circumstances are present. If necessary to facilitate courts martial action, Retired Soldiers may be ordered to active duty.
All retired officers can be recalled to duty. It happened to Rickover twice. ‘74 and ‘77.
Retired officers receiving pay are still subject to the UCMJ.
We have some freepers with more recent military legal experience than mine. But there probably still are 3 categories of military retirees, enlisted, reserve officers, regular officers.
Enlisted retirees as far as I know can be voluntarily recalled, but only if they agree. They are not subject to the UCMJ while retired.
Then there are reserve officers and regular officers. When retired, reserve officers are generally not subject to recall and are not subject to the UCMJ.
Then there are regular officers. Most active duty Air Force officers (I can’t speak for other services) in the rank of major or above are regular officers. They are commissioned for life, and in retirement are just moved from the active duty list to the retired list. They can be recalled to active duty any time.
They are also technically still subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, at least in certain circumstances. For example, committing a crime on a military base. How far this goes has not been tested in court, to my knowledge.
Considering the subject, I don’t think I’d better comment any further. ;-)
To a point. The winner writes history. In 2020, I saw the democrat party, led by Al gore and Joe Liberman, attempt to disenfranchise military voters in Florida, and steal the election. That was when I doffed my uniform and marched against the coup. Had Gore prevailed, my story would have been different.
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.