- Joined
- Jan 15, 2006
- Posts
- 123,002
- Reaction score
- 4,586
- Points
- 113
The Uniform Code of Military Justice limits speech on soldiers for various things and has never been deemed unconstitutional.
For example, the UCMJ provision in Article 88 makes it a crime for an officer to use contemptuous words against the president, the vice president, Congress, the secretary of defense, the secretary of a military department, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, and the list goes on.
Of course, Article 88 applies across the board, evenly, regardless of gender, religion, ethnic origin, and so on. It is non-discriminatory, whereas "don't ask, don't tell" is discriminatory. But if the legal issue is not of discrimination but rather on First Amendment grounds, that's going to be much more of a challenge.
Not that much. It will come down to the govt. having to demonstrate that there is a military interest in restricting this specific sort of speech, and then that there is a compelling state interest to do so, i.e. that the military interest is a matter of such speech substantially impairing the ability of the military to do its job.
It doesn't make it tougher, it just narrowly defines the playing field, and also does so in a strategic way: there's a LOT of stuff on the side of the LRC lawyers on that turf.










