When the Uniform Meets the Constitution: Why Military Officers Can Not Afford to Talk Politics

Freedom of Speech Doesn't Apply here

In recent years, a number of military officers have learned a hard lesson: you may wear the uniform of the United States, but the First Amendment doesn’t always wear it with you. Military Officers Can Not Afford to Talk Politics.

Yes, the Constitution guarantees the right to free speech. But the moment you swear an oath and put on that uniform; you’re also swearing allegiance to the Constitution through the office of the President of the United States — your Commander in Chief. And that changes everything.

Freedom of Speech: Not an Absolute Right in Uniform

The First Amendment is one of the most sacred principles of American democracy. It protects citizens’ rights to speak freely, practice religion, assemble, and petition the government.

But in the military, those freedoms come with strict limitations. The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and Department of Defense directives sharply curtail the political speech and activity of active-duty personnel. The reasons are straightforward: discipline, order, and the apolitical foundation of the armed forces. If officers or enlisted members start choosing what orders to follow or voicing dissent about the Commander in Chief, the entire chain of command collapses.

Let’s be clear: you will get fired. You will lose the confidence of your superiors. You will be relieved of your duties.

Recent Examples: Speaking Out, Falling Hard

1. Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller (USMC)

Perhaps the most well-known recent example, Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller publicly criticized senior military leaders — and by extension, the Biden administration — for the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021. His viral video cost him his command. He was relieved of duty for “a loss of trust and confidence in his ability to command” and later court-martialed for violating lawful general orders.

2. Capt. Brett Crozier (USN)

While not a political statement per se, Capt. Crozier’s leaked letter criticizing the Navy’s response to COVID-19 aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt during the Trump administration was perceived as a breach of chain-of-command discipline. He was relieved of command despite widespread public and crew support.

3. Maj. Matt Lohmeier (USSF)

In 2021, Lohmeier was relieved of command of a Space Force unit after promoting a self-published book criticizing Marxism and “leftist ideologies” in the military. His politically charged commentary on a podcast and in interviews violated DoD rules against partisan political activity.

4. Air Force Tech Sgt. Cory Reeves (AFRC)

In 2020, Reeves was investigated for his involvement in a white nationalist group — something he denied but which stemmed from online political posts. The case emphasized how even social media activity can jeopardize a service member’s position and security clearance.

These cases weren’t about silencing dissent — they were about preserving the integrity and unity of an apolitical fighting force.

Commander in Chief = Your Boss

The President of the United States isn’t just a politician to the military. He’s the top of the chain of command. Regardless of your personal beliefs — Republican, Democrat, or independent — once orders come down, they’re lawful unless deemed illegal or immoral. Disagreeing in silence is one thing. Doing it publicly or refusing to carry out lawful directives? That’s insubordination.

Imagine any workplace where an employee publicly insults or refuses the orders of their CEO — most wouldn’t last the day. The military operates under far stricter standards.

The Difference Between Citizens and Soldiers

The U.S. military isn’t a debating society. It is a warfighting organization, governed by hierarchy and discipline. When you put on the uniform, you represent the government, the people, and the Constitution — all three, simultaneously. That means your individual political opinions must take a back seat.

The Hatch Act, DoD Directive 1344.10, and Articles 88 and 92 of the UCMJ clearly spell out these restrictions. Officers, in particular, are held to higher standards. Article 88 makes it a punishable offense for officers to use contemptuous words against the President, Vice President, and Congress.

Workplace Politics in Uniform: A Dangerous Game

Political division in civilian workplaces can lead to tension, awkwardness, or HR complaints. In the military, it can lead to a court-martial, a dishonorable discharge, or loss of security clearance.

Think about the stakes: our military doesn’t just work in an office — it operates on battlefields and in life-or-death scenarios. Political infighting can cost lives.

That’s why it’s dangerous for troops to publicly align with political movements, wear partisan T-shirts, share inflammatory posts, or speak out on camera. The cost isn’t just personal. It’s institutional.

Final Thoughts: Silence Isn’t Cowardice — It’s Duty

Some argue that preventing service members from speaking politically is a violation of their rights. But in reality, it’s a necessary sacrifice to ensure the U.S. military remains of the people, for the people, and above politics.

If you want to be politically active, wait until you take off the uniform. Until then, the mission — not the message — comes first.