Talk:Uniform Code of Military Justice

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Law

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Military history: North America / United States

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

ROTC

Since when are ROTC cadets and midshipmen subject to the UCMJ? The article states they are: "Also, Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) cadets and midshipmen as members of reserve components are subject to the UCMJ while on inactive-duty training." All Army cadets are in the United States Army Reserve Control Group as cadets but are exempt from the UCMJ. If a cadet is ALSO in the reserves such as SMP, then yes he or she is subject as a member of the reserves, but not as a cadet.Scalga (talk) 20:08, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They are not. Art. 2 of the UCMJ that establishes jurisdiction mentions cadets and midshipmen, but both of those terms are defined in Art. 1 as meaning cadets and midshipmen of the service academies. It does not include ROTC cadets. See also Woodrick v. Divich, 24 M.J. 147, 150 fn2 (C.M.A. 1987) ("Article 2(a)(2), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 802(a)(2), which includes '[c]adets, aviation cadets, and midshipmen,' applies to cadets at the service academies, but it does not encompass AFROTC cadets."). GregJackP Boomer! 08:44, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Citation

I think the citation to the statue is incorrect. The UCMJ is codified at 10 U.S.C. 801 et. seq. If I'm not mistaken, can someone please change the cite? Zandar555 (talk) 09:06, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably ought to say, "ROTC cadets and midshipmen" and "Academy cadets and midshipmen" instead of just "cadets". After all, 3/5 of the academies have midshipmen, vs. 2/5 having cadets. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.2.62.115 (talk) 12:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong, three-fifths are CADETS! The Coast Guard Academy designates their students' rank as cadets, not midshipmen.Todd Gallagher (talk) 00:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From an email to Wikimedia:

"The UCMJ was first established in 1950. President Truman was President from 1945 to 1953, which mean he established the UCMJ. President Eisenhower was President from 1953 to 1961 so he could not have established the UCMJ. It underwent a major revision in 1968. President Lyndon B. Johnson was President from 1963 to 1969."

Could someone please check this and fix the article as needed? It's not my area at all. Thanks -- sannse (talk) 18:07, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Housebreaking.

The link to "housebreaking" goes to training household pets. I think you mean to link to a disambiguation page with something like this: http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/bl130.htm.

Title 10 or Title 50?

Is the Uniform Code of Military Justice at 10 U.S.C. ch. 47 or 50 U.S.C. ch. 22? It looks like it's both. Was it moved? —Markles 21:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was moved to Title 10. If you follow the Title 50 links, you'll find that all the UCMJ-related subsections in Title 50 have been repealed. — Dale Arnett (talk) 23:52, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Desertion

AWOL, missing movement, and desertion all link to desertion. These charges are completely different and carry completely different penalties. These links should change and have pages correctly written to show the differences in the charges. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thehotshotpilot (talk • contribs) 05:29, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jurisdiction

A more extensive listing than I expected. But some additional specifics of interest- can the following under certain conditions could the following be subject to UCMJ: behavior of press while embedded or with a military unit in field or operational status, or what about civilian (non-uniformed) members of the Department of Defense ( or even contractors. In some television show, under some circumstances personnel in these categories were subject to UCMJ for their actions. Wfoj2 (talk) 00:40, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Does the UCMJ apply to the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces or to the various cabinet members (Defense, Army, Navy, etc) ? NitPicker769 (talk) 19:09, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While POTUS has the Constitutional authority as Commander in Chief over the armed forces, s/he is not a member of the armed forces. Nor are the service secretaries. Thus the UCMJ does not apply. The article is correct in that it tells us who -- e.g., members -- are subject to the UCMJ. No change is needed.--S. Rich (talk) 19:30, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks... NitPicker769 (talk) 03:14, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Uniform Code of Military Justice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719173532/http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL34697_20081006.pdf to http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL34697_20081006.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:56, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

UCMJ laws

Hi, I'm working on a book, but I can't access the UCMJ laws page. Can someone copy and paste please? Faithful15 (talk) 17:49, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I mean from the links, not from the Wikipage Faithful15 (talk) 17:50, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jurisdiction Section

Doesn't this section belong more under the court's martial page? Chefs-kiss (talk) 12:13, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]