A question was raised during an EEO class today about talking politics in the shop. Our instructor told us that as Federal Employees we weren't allowed to criticize the President's policies. I decided to look it up.
Military retirees fall under the article under some conditions. The only exception seems to be political conversations.
Nobody's ever been convicted for bad-mouthing the President. They have to have done it in an official capacity it seems for it to stick. Freedom of speech allows a member of Congress or civilian to criticize the President where as an active duty member or retiree cannot.
Harry Reid called President Bush a loser once. If he had been ex-military and receiving a pension he could have been nailed under Article 88 of the UCMJ especially because he was in an official capacity when he said it. It's still kind of shaky it seems.
So was the instructor full of it or was she telling it like it is. Are Federal employees prohibited from bad-mouthing the President and his policies?
Link
Article 88
The current provision of military law criminalizing disrespectful
criticism of the President, and other specified civilian
officials and institutions, is contained in Article 88, UCMJ.
That article provides:
Any 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 Transportation, or the
Governor or legislature of any State, Territory,
Commonwealth, or possession in which
he is on duty or present shall be punished as
a court-martial may direct.
Military retirees fall under the article under some conditions. The only exception seems to be political conversations.
Potential Defenses
Political Discussion
Historically, certain forms of political discussions, although critical of the President, have been considered beyond the reach of military law. To prosecute an officer or soldier for engaging in a purely political conversation was considered inquisitorial and beneath the dignity of the [g]overnment. This exception has not always been honored in practice, however. Indeed, the political discussion defense has been interpreted so narrowly that commentators have questioned its very existence.
The current Manual continues this limitation on Article 88s scope stating: 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. Unfortunately, the Manual fails to define the parameters of a political discussion.
Nobody's ever been convicted for bad-mouthing the President. They have to have done it in an official capacity it seems for it to stick. Freedom of speech allows a member of Congress or civilian to criticize the President where as an active duty member or retiree cannot.
Harry Reid called President Bush a loser once. If he had been ex-military and receiving a pension he could have been nailed under Article 88 of the UCMJ especially because he was in an official capacity when he said it. It's still kind of shaky it seems.
So was the instructor full of it or was she telling it like it is. Are Federal employees prohibited from bad-mouthing the President and his policies?
Link
Article 88