# Treason--Civilian Courts vs. UCMJ? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 23, 2003, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478 "2003-03-23T02:24:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![asterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4da419/32.png) [@asterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asterion)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/1 "2003-03-23T02:24:22Z")
Well with the latest news of what might have happened in Iraq, what does it take for a treason charge in the military? Civilian requirements are spelled out in the Constitution, of course, but are there changes for the military, especially in wartime? ---
**Author:** ![Reeder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Reeder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reeder)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/2 "2003-03-23T02:27:26Z")
Of course they are the same. Do you think military law would override the Constitution? ---
**Author:** ![asterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4da419/32.png) [@asterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asterion)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/3 "2003-03-23T02:37:59Z")
As I said in the Pit, Reeder, yes. ---
**Author:** ![Reeder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Reeder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reeder)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/4 "2003-03-23T02:45:23Z")
I can’t find a listing for treason in the UCMJ. Only for espionage. ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/5 "2003-03-23T02:52:25Z")
The comparable charge under the [Uniform Code of Military Justice](http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj2.htm#SUBCHAPTER%20X.%20PUNITIVE%20ARTICLES) would be “aiding the enemy”. ---
**Author:** ![Reeder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Reeder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reeder)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/6 "2003-03-23T02:56:40Z")
That’s still not treason as defined by the constitution. ---
**Author:** ![asterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4da419/32.png) [@asterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asterion)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/7 "2003-03-23T03:04:12Z")
Fair enough, Reeder. But, as someone else posted in the Pit, assaulting your commisioned superior officer during wartime carries a penalty of death. As I said, I’m waiting for a lawyer–preferably a military lawyer–to show up. ---
**Author:** ![Convict](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Convict](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Convict)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/8 "2003-03-23T03:13:52Z")
Treason, as defined in the Constitution: > [@](#): > > Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. This is covered by the following in the UCMJ: Sec. 899 Art. 99 Misbehavior Before the Enemy Sec. 918 Art. 118 Murder Sec. 904 Art. 104 Aiding the Enemy There no other provisions for treason in the UCMJ. IANAL, but I believe that anyone charged with the specific charge of “Treason” would be charged in a civilian court. Therefore, the requirements as defined in the Constitution apply to military members. ---
**Author:** ![Convict](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Convict](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Convict)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/9 "2003-03-23T03:22:49Z")
Sorry, I forgot the cite: [http://www.treasoninc.com/legalities.html](http://www.treasoninc.com/legalities.html) ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/10 "2003-03-23T03:51:37Z")
The military discharges (dishonorably) you, then you get tried for treason. It was in a movie, or a book, or something. 😉 It’s a civilian crime. Actually, I think they told us that in boot camp. Peace, mangeorge. ---
**Author:** ![Convict](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Convict](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Convict)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/11 "2003-03-23T03:58:07Z")
I thought that an active military member would be charged with a crime under the UCMJ rather than discharged and tried as a civilian. All of the charges listed above are punishable by death both in peace and war. If tried as a civilian the punishment would be set by Congress (per the Constitution). Besides, military court martials usually are faster than civilian trials. ---
**Author:** ![asterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4da419/32.png) [@asterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asterion)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/12 "2003-03-23T04:00:01Z")
Okay, I admit it. I guess I was sloppy in my language. ---
**Author:** ![Nametag](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nametag/32/406_2.png) [@Nametag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nametag)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/13 "2003-03-23T04:09:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Convict \* > \*\*This is covered by the following in the UCMJ: > > Sec. 899 Art. 99 Misbehavior Before the Enemy > > Sec. 918 Art. 118 Murder > > Sec. 904 Art. 104 Aiding the Enemy > > There no other provisions for treason in the UCMJ. \*\* Don’t you think that Sec. 894 Art. 94 (a)(2) Sedition is applicable? > [@](#): > > Any person subject to this chapter who … 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 ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/14 "2003-03-23T04:10:06Z")
That very well could be, **Convict**. My memory is pretty vague. Anyway, you can’t believe _everything_ those military types tell you. ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/15 "2003-03-23T04:27:59Z")
The UCMJ is federal law, maybe that has some bearing on the answer. ---
**Author:** ![Convict](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Convict](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Convict)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/16 "2003-03-23T04:28:28Z")
I did not see that, **Nametag**. The website I got my information from did not reference that section. I would think that sedition would fall under aiding the enemy: > [@](#): > > Any person who– > > (1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or > > (2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or [protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly I would think that sedition would fall under the “other things” provision. However, I could be wrong (IANAL). Regardless, thank-you for pointing that section out for us. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/17 "2003-03-23T05:03:14Z")
mangeorge got it in three. The Constitution is the basic law also for the military. The Uniform Code of Military Justice, aka UCMJ, is a particular code of the federal law enacted by Congress and signed into law by the President. What others have posted above is the punitive article relating to sedition. Treason is as defined in the Constitution. On a semi-related issue: yet another piece of scum for a human being, this time retired Air Force Master Sergeant, got sent up for espionage. And the federal government agreed to let his wife continue to draw a portion of his retirement pay. Strike Two in the Reality Arena for federal prosecutions is all I have to say at the moment about that. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/18 "2003-03-23T05:06:47Z")
What I’m referring to is that it’s unreal that the government sees fit to continue to pay the pension (aka “retainer pay”) of a member of the military when said member is convicted of espionage. ---
**Author:** ![Convict](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Convict](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Convict)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/19 "2003-03-23T05:21:16Z")
Just for clarification, **Monty**. If a soldier aiding the enemy is treason, why have two laws regarding the crime? After all, the UCMJ and the Constitution both provide for punishment of the crime. I guess I’m trying to figure out where the UCMJ stops and the Constitution takes over. Does my question make sense? ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 7:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478/20 "2003-03-23T07:53:27Z")
Convict: Kind of, but I’m not sure you’re getting the difference between sedition and treason. Since they are two different issues, they’re two different crimes. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/treason-civilian-courts-vs-ucmj/163478.md?page=2)