The Department of War’s (DOW) directive to enforce “ruthless, dispassionate” standards is a sudden, jarring shift away from the previously permissive culture. The increased civilian political engagement, disregard for standards, and open disrespect seen across social media and in the ranks are now in direct conflict with a command structure empowered to enforce discipline without fear of IG reprisal.
This collision will likely result in a sharp, immediate spike in UCMJ charges under specific articles as people push back. If you are questioning standards or engaging in public dissent, you are on a fast track to severe consequences.
The UCMJ Articles Now on High Alert
Offenses related to disobedience, contempt, and public misconduct will be prosecuted with zeal, as commanders have been explicitly told that “unfit, undertrained troops [are] no longer tolerated.”
Disobedience (Article 90, Article 92)
These are the key Articles for enforcing the new fitness, grooming, and standards directives. Depending on the degree of intent, violations and derelictions can be punished by years in confinement and a punitive discharge.
Violation of General Order/Regulation
This covers the new DOW grooming and fitness standards. Knowledge of widely published regulations is presumed.
Failure to Obey Other Lawful Orders
Refusing a direct order from a superior concerning physical training, a weight-control regimen, or an order to stop controversial social media activity. The order is presumed lawful, and the burden of proving it illegal rests entirely on the defense, an exceptionally high burden.
Dereliction of Duty
Negligently failing to maintain assigned combat readiness (i.e., being “out of shape” or “undertrained”).
Disrespect, Contempt, and Social Media (Articles 88, 89, 91, 133, 134)
The recent surge in public political commentary (e.g., members in uniform on social media celebrating the assassination of Charlie Kirk by members of the military, a situation Sec. Hegseth has addressed expressly) are direct violations of military ethics and are now subject to immediate, ruthless enforcement. Violations of these Articles can be punished by years in jail and a punitive discharge.
- Article 88 (Contempt Toward Officials): Prohibits officers from using contemptuous words against senior U.S. officials (President, Secretary of War, etc.). In the past this might have drawn a reprimand; in the new climate, it is a direct challenge to authority.
- Article 89 (Disrespect Toward Superior): Posting disrespectful comments about leadership on social media falls here. Service members are subject to the UCMJ even when off duty, which has been often ignored until now.
- Article 133 (Conduct Unbecoming an Officer): This broad “catch-all” will be a primary weapon against officers who defy the DOW’s mandate to eliminate “woke garbage.” Because Article 133 is broad, any conduct seen as dishonorable, dishonest, or indecent, including social media behavior, can be prosecuted.
- Article 134 (General Article: Disloyal Statements): Posts, videos, or tweets celebrating domestic terrorism (e.g., the Kirk assassination) or political speech prejudicial to good order and discipline will be charged here. This is especially dangerous for service members who use their real names and appear in uniform, creating a direct, palpable effect on the mission.
The Consequences of Resistance
For service members who feel “this is not what they signed up for,” understand the immediate, high-consequence reality of the new War Department:
- No “Walking on Eggshells”: Commanders have maximum authority to enforce standards. Previous UCI concerns or fears of IG retaliation will not restrain current actions.
- Loss of Protection: The overhaul of IG and MEO/EEO processes means anonymous complaints are gone, and a “credibility assessment” must be completed within seven days. Frivolous or “non-credible” complaints will be dismissed and may result in punishment for the complainant.
- Obey First: The “Obey First, Question Later” doctrine is now enforced with renewed rigor. Disobeying an order, even one you suspect is unlawful, carries extreme risk. Your defense team must prove the order was “manifestly illegal,” a nearly impossible burden.
If your appearance, fitness, or political expression, or even your desire to express yourself, puts you at odds with the new DOW directives, your career is now at immediate and profound risk. Call an expert defense firm before you refuse an order or post another video.
Politician: “You Must Not Obey Unlawful Orders” — UCMJ: Orders are Presumed to be Lawful
In 2025, some political activist groups and a few elected officials have urged service members to disobey orders they claim are unlawful. This is reckless advice, even if given by a “former JAG.”
Under the UCMJ, all orders are presumed lawful. That presumption exists so military members can carry out their duties without the obligation of being untrained constitutional scholars evaluating the lawfulness of every order.
While some politicians and ex-JAGs will imply otherwise, the truth is that “the dictates of a person’s conscience, religion, or personal philosophy cannot justify or excuse the disobedience of an otherwise lawful order.” (Article 90)
Articles 90, 91, and 92 all come into play when a troop refuses an order. Article 94 covers mutiny and sedition. Soliciting others to refuse orders can trigger the same article. The punishments for violating these orders can be catastrophic.
The people telling you to disobey are not the ones who will stand in front of a commander, judge, or jury someday. They are not the ones whose careers, pay, and families will absorb the consequences. You are not a pawn in someone else’s fight. Do not let anyone talk you into becoming a test case so they can score points on social media.
Making matters worse, the same politicians have warned that troops who obey “unlawful orders” will be prosecuted years from now when the next administration is in power. This is meant to scare you into disobeying current orders.
UCMJ law already makes room for truly unlawful orders, and the standard is strict. A patently illegal order is rare and obvious. If you ever face one, you will know it (e.g., “rape that prisoner”). Routine operations do not come close to that standard. Do not let threats from outside actors make you second-guess your chain of command or your oath.
The Strategic Exit: AWOL as the Ultimate Act of Disengagement
The surge in disciplinary action under the new standards will push some service members to the breaking point, leading to an increase in Unauthorized Absence (AWOL). This is the service member’s ultimate and most dangerous form of protest.
- AWOL is being gone without permission. Consequences depend heavily on duration; it is the most common charge.
- Desertion requires proof that you intended to remain away permanently or left to avoid hazardous duty. If you remain gone for more than 30 days, law-enforcement systems will automatically classify you as a deserter. Destroying your uniform or ID card, or attempting to leave after receiving deployment orders, is powerful circumstantial evidence of permanent intent, and the prosecution will pursue the most severe charges.
Q: If I walk away, receive an Other Than Honorable (OTH) discharge, can it be upgraded later?
A: No. There is no automatic upgrade for an OTH discharge and no realistic chance of changing it later.
This myth, often spread by barracks lawyers and civilian “hotlines,” cost many service members dearly during the GWOT. An OTH discharge for AWOL is permanent. If the War Department had the time to court-martial every AWOL or other act of rebellion, it would. Receiving an OTH instead of confinement is already the break you’ll be given.
Your only recourse is to stop the AWOL clock immediately, let an attorney coordinate your return, and allow us to build a mitigation case based on your service history and the circumstances of your absence.
Do not attempt to navigate this climate alone. Whether you are considering disobedience, engaging in public dissent, or contemplating unauthorized absence, every minute of delay increases the consequences.
Call the firm that specializes in strategic defense against unrestricted command power. We know the rules of engagement, and we are ready to build your defense strategy immediately or help you avoid trouble in the first place.
Call us for a confidential strategy review: 800-319-3134.