UCMJ – United States Code of Military Justice


10. Punitive Articles

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who–

(1) with intent to usurp or override lawful military authority, refuses, in concert with any other person, to obey orders or otherwise do his duty or creates any violence or disturbance is guilty of mutiny;

(2) with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of lawful civil authority, creates, in concert with any other person, revolt, violence, or disturbance against that authority is guilty of sedition;

(3) fails to do his utmost to prevent and suppress a mutiny or sedition being committed in his presence, or fails to take all reasonable means to inform his superior commissioned officer or commanding officer of a mutiny or sedition which he knows or has reason to believe is taking place, is guilty of a failure to suppress or report a mutiny or sedition.

(b) A person who is found guilty of attempted mutiny, mutiny, sedition, or failure to suppress or report a mutiny or sedition shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court- martial may direct.

4 Comments for this entry

  • Darrell Bartell

    I am looking for court records pertaining to a court-marital from 1982-84 c.a. in Frankfurt, Germany. Where are they and how do I get a copy?

  • Dar Horn

    If soldiers are required to protect the constitution, at what point are they required to prevent the actions of the Commander in Chief who is violating the Constitution?

    • Shore Rock

      Dar Horn – Certainly not until such actions have been found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, where is where all decisions regarding constitutionality ultimately reside.

  • Elizabeth Moon

    “Preventing the actions” of any senior in the chain of command is an action that will be tested in court to determine if the soldier was correct in a) judgment of the situation and b) the necessity to act against the senior. Since soldiers are not, in general, experts in Constitutional law, their opinions of any President’s actions–whether those do in fact violate the Constitution or merely do not accord with the soldier’s understanding of it–are much more likely to be flawed than accurate. So there is no defined point at which individuals can take action or might be required to take action against a Commander in Chief.

    Moreover, outside sources are a fallible guide to Constitutional law; states’ attorneys-general (including mine) have in the past few years erred in interpreting the Constitution on such matters as whether one state must honor Article IV, Section 1 (“Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.”) Political sites and media are just as bad if not worse. You can’t trust ’em.

    I have lived through eleven Presidents so far. Several of them did illegal things that affected the national interests. Several of them did things that probably violated the Constitution (I think so, but their supporters did not agree, and in several of those instances, Congress was solidly in favor of the President’s actions); in none of those cases did I feel that anything more than voting the incumbent out of office was necessary.

    Mutiny and sedition are deadly serious affairs. It would take something worse than any President I’ve observed or read about to be worth another one.

Leave a Reply


Looking for something?

Search the Uniform Code of Military Justice