Blog

It’s hard to believe that another year has come and gone. 2025 was an exciting year filled with battles won, new clients we were proud to represent, and the continued growth of our law practice. Through it all, MJA has worked diligently to provide our clients with the highest quality representation and to fulfill our mission of Defending Those Who Defend Us ®.

Court-Martial Defense and Appeals 

MJA’s court-martial practice saw incredible success in 2025 resulting in acquittals at trial, withdrawal and dismissal of charges, and even a conviction being overturned on appeal. Our attorneys traveled around the world representing service member facing court-martial charges.

In one memorable case, MJA represented an Army Staff Sergeant (E-6) at general court-martial charged with murder after a deadly shooting incident in Texas. MJA mounted a vigorous self-defense strategy, demonstrating that the Staff Sergeant acted lawfully to protect himself and others. At trial, MJA effectively cross-examined witnesses and highlighted forensic evidence supporting the self-defense claim. After deliberation, the panel found the Staff Sergeant NOT GUILTY, fully acquitting him of all charges and allowing him to continue his military career without conviction or punishment.

In another case, a Marine Staff Sergeant was tried at general court-martial for allegations of adultery, domestic violence, assault, child endangerment, false swearing, obstruction of justice, and more. MJA mounted a vigorous defense strategy at trial, demonstrating that the Staff Sergeant acted lawfully to protect himself during the alleged assault and that the other allegations against him were legally and factually insufficient. Multiple charges and specifications were dismissed or resulted in a directed finding of not guilty before jury even retired to deliberate. The jury found the Staff Sergeant NOT GUILTY on all remaining charges. The Marine received “no punishment” for the single adultery offense and walked out of the courtroom a free man.

In addition to acquittals at trial, MJA successfully appealed the court-martial conviction of a Soldier. After being convicted at trial of sexual assault and abusive sexual contact in violation of Article 120, UCMJ, the Soldier retained MJA to help fight the conviction on appeal. MJA reviewed the court-martial proceedings and appealed the Soldier’s conviction to the Army Court of Criminal Appeals, raising five assignments of error. The Army Court of Criminal Appeals agreed that an error occurred at trial when the military judge denied a defense expert from testifying, and that the error resulted in prejudice to the Soldier. As a result, the Court set aside the findings of guilty and the sentence.

Court-martial defense remains at the heart of MJA’s military law practice. It means the world to us that we are able to know our clients personally, fight for them in their darkest hour, and share in their celebration when we succeed!

Administrative Separation Defense 

MJA also saw incredible success representing dozens of service members facing administrative separation for allegations ranging from drug abuse to sexual assault.

In one case, a Machinist's Mate Second Class (E-5) in the United States Navy was investigated for allegations that he sexually assaulted three fellow Sailors. After prosecutors declined to prefer charges, the command forced the MM2 to non-judicial punishment, where despite his pleas of not guilty, the Commander found the Sailor guilty of sexual assault while on ship, punished him, and then notified him of involuntary separation. At the Sailor’s board MJA quickly dismantled the Government’s case by exposing the motive to fabricate shared by all three alleged victims, which created considerable doubt as to whether any or all of the allegations were even remotely true. By a unanimous vote of 3-0, the board members found that the evidence did not meet the preponderance standard and retained the Sailor on active duty.

In another case, a Captain (O-3) in the United States Army was required to show cause for retention before a Board of Inquiry after testing positive for Delta-8 Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC-8). Facing the loss of their military career and medical retirement, the officer hired MJA to defend them at the board. MJA aggressively challenged the sufficiency of the government’s evidence and requested a directed verdict at the close of the government’s case, arguing legal and factual insufficiency. The Board agreed and found no basis for the alleged drug abuse, retaining the officer on active duty.

Throughout 2025, MJA represented numerous service members accused of drug abuse with speculator results for our clients:

• Quantico, Virginia. Marine Retained, Separation Board Finds "No Basis" After Positive Urinalysis for THC-8.

• San Diego, California. Sailor Retained, Adsep Board Finds "No Basis" After Sailor Tests Positive for “Delta-9” THC.

• Fort Benning, Georgia. Army Staff Sergeant Found Not Guilty of Drug Abuse at Article 15 Proceedings.

• Fort Bragg, North Carolina. Officer Retained, BOI Finds "No Basis" After Officer Tests Positive for “Delta-9” THC.

• Fort Gordon, Georgie. Officer Retained, Board Finds "No Basis" After Officer Tests Positive for “Delta-8” THC

• Norfolk, Virginia. AdSep Board Finds "No Basis" After Sailor Tests Positive for Methamphetamines.

• Suffolk, Virginia. Petty Officer's Positive Urinalysis for Delta-8 THC Determined to be Innocent Ingestion.

These are just a few of the many results MJA saw in its administrative separation defense. MJA is honored to fight for the careers of servicemembers.

Military Correction Board Appeals

At the military’s correction boards, MJA helped clients upgrade their characterization of service, expunge titling and indexing determinations, and remove unfavorable records from their official military personnel files.

In one memorable case, MJA represented a former Air Force Officer 20 years after his discharge. In 2007, the officer was involuntarily separated with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge under AFI 36-3207 (misconduct) following a general court-martial conviction that did not result in a punitive discharge. MJA petitioned the AFDRB requesting a discharge upgrade on behalf of the officer and provided evidence that the discharge and characterization of service were unjust. After an initial denial, MJA submitted for reconsideration pursuant to an Air Force-wide class action lawsuit. Upon review, the AFDRB reversed its original decision and upgraded the officer to a fully HONORABLE characterization of service. The AFDRB also changed the narrative reason to Secretarial Authority and reentry code to 3K.

In a case before the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB), MJA successfully fought for a client’s upgrade from OTH to Honorable. In 2010, a Marine Corporal was administratively discharged with an Other than Honorable (OTH) characterization of service after receiving two NJPs and multiple counselings for violating Article 86 (AWOL) and 92 (Orders Violation), UCMJ. MJA appealed to the NDRB and provided substantial evidence that the Marine's substantive and procedural rights were violated during the separation process and that an OTH discharge was unjust under the circumstances. The NDRB agreed with MJA that the Marine's service met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance and that MJA submitted substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption of regularity in government affairs. Based on these findings, the Board unanimously determined that an OTH discharge was inequitable and upgraded the Marine to a FULLY HONORABLE characterization of service.

MJA also found success in the ever-difficult arena of titling appeals. In one case, MJA represented a Soldier who had been titled and indexed for suspected violations of Articles 128b, 128, and 92, UCMJ. After CID denied the initial expungement request, MJA appealed the decision to the ABCMR. The ABCMR found that while probable cause existed when the Soldier was initially titled, probable cause no longer exists because the allegations had been withdrawn and a Commander’s Report indicated there was no probable cause after interviewing the alleged victim. Accordingly, the ABCMR recommended that all Department of the Army records of the Soldier be corrected to show removal of the Soldier's name as the subject from the Defense Central Index of Investigations and any other record related to the report.

Military Mass Torts

In 2025, MJA recovered millions of dollars for Marines and their families who were harmed by the contaminated water at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. As Marines ourselves, this litigation has been particularly personal to us.

As background, for over 30 years, Marines, their loved ones, and civilian contractors living and working aboard at Camp Lejeune were exposed to drinking water systems contaminated with industrial chemicals. Numerous types of cancers and other serious health conditions have been linked to these contaminants. After years of denying justice to those harmed by the contaminated water, the Camp Lejeune Justice Act (CLJA) became law in 2022, creating a federal cause of action to allow those who suffered from water contamination to file lawsuits for compensation.

While the government continues to fight against compensating Marines and their families for claims brought under the CLJA, 2025 showed a glimmer of hope as some Marines received financial awards for medical conditions they had sustained. MJA anticipates that 2026 will be a ground-breaking year for litigation as cases eventually go to trial.

MJA also spent 2025 pursuing claims for active-duty service members, veterans, civilians, and first responders who suffered injuries or illnesses caused by exposure to Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF). Known commonly as firefighting or firefighter foam, AFFF has been linked to various types of cancers, ulcerative colitis, thyroid disease, and devastating consequences for victims and families.

Defense Base Act / SCRA

In 2025, under the Defense Base Act, MJA fought hard to obtain medical treatment and significant financial compensation for civilians, military veterans, and local nationals who were injured while working as overseas contractors. MJA also represented service members whose rights were violated under the Servicemember Civil Relief Act (SCRA), resulting in financial compensation and other benefits.

Adopted in 1941, the Defense Base Act provides workers’ compensation protection to civilian employees working outside the United States on U.S. military bases or under a contract with the U.S. government for public works or for national defense. Contractors who have been exposed to and incurred a physical or psychological injury due to their work overseas may be eligible for medical treatment or other benefits.

The Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA) is a consumer protection statute that provides certain legal protections for military service members facing potential mortgage foreclosure, vehicle repossession, and usury interest rates for certain installment contracts, among other rights. The SCRA is a powerful federal law that provides qualifying service members will additional legal rights and remedies. 

At MJA, it is our honor to represent the military community and those who support it, and we are excited to continue to represent clients under the Defense Base Act and SCRA in 2026.

MJA Welcomed New Attorney and Staff

In 2025, MJA was pleased to welcome a number of new teammates to the firm including office manager Stacey Kahill, paralegal Lisa Young, and attorney Amy Thomas. 

Thomas joined the firm’s military and administrative law practices. Before joining MJA, Thomas served 22 years in the Marine Corps, culminating her military career as Deputy Staff Judge Advocate at Marine Forces Reserve where she provided comprehensive legal guidance to a three-star command across all aspects of military law. In this senior leadership role, she advised command leadership on complex legal matters affecting reserve operations and military personnel worldwide.

Throughout her military tenure, Thomas developed extensive trial experience serving as both government counsel and defense counsel in federal criminal proceedings. Thomas also boasts a comprehensive experience in military administrative law, having handled countless enlisted administrative separation boards and officer boards of inquiry.

Before joining MJA, Thomas served as a labor and employment attorney with the Defense Health Agency, where she led the DHA Office of General Counsel Investigation’s Cell. In this role, she was primarily responsible for investigating allegations of employee misconduct and recommending appropriate adjudicatory measures to DHA leadership.

With over two decades of distinguished military legal experience and federal employment law expertise, MJA was thrilled to have Amy join the firm and equally grateful for the outstanding professional support provided by our staff. 

Thank you!

MJA is thankful for all the clients we were able to help in 2025 and looks forward to fighting for more service members in the new year. If you or a loved one need an experienced military attorney in your corner, contact us today for a free consultation.

The offenses criminalized under Article 120, UCMJ, are among the most serious crimes a person can commit. Article 120 prohibits not only non-consensual sexual conduct involving adults or minors but also acts of sexual indecency that do not result in physical contact. Regardless of the charge, however, one thing is clear – a conviction under Article 120 is serious and life changing.

When your military career, future, and freedom are on the line, you need an experienced law firm in your corner. The attorneys at MJA have decades of experience and have defended service members charged with some of the most serious offenses under the UCMJ, including allegations of sexual misconduct. Contact one of our military defense lawyers today to learn more.

Overview of Article 120, UCMJ, Offenses

Article 120, UCMJ, contains four general categories of offenses:

• Article 120, Rape and Sexual Assault
• Article 120a, Mail, Deposit of Obscene Matter
• Article 120b, Rape and Sexual Assault of a Child
• Article 120c, Other Sexual Misconduct

Article 120, Rape and Sexual Assault, criminalizes unlawful sexual contact in which the victim is an adult. This includes not only penetrative offenses like rape and sexual assault, but also abusive sexual contact which involves sexual touching. Click here for a more detailed explanation of the elements, penalties, and defenses for an Article 120 charge.

In contrast, Article 120a, Mail, Deposit of Obscene Matter, does not involve any sexual touching but rather prohibits a service member from depositing or causing to be deposited in the mail obscene material. You can read more about Article 120a offenses in our blog.

Article 120b (Rape and Sexual Assault of a Child)

There is perhaps no offense under the UCMJ more serious than rape and sexual assault of a child. Any such allegation will be thoroughly investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Potential offenses under Article 120b include rape, sexual assault, and sexual abuse. These offenses cover numerous potential circumstances under which the offense might have occurred, from force to threats to the use of intoxicants, and authorize different punishments based on the age of the child.

Article 120b also criminalizes “lewd acts” which may or may not involve any sexual touching but are nonetheless indecent. Lewd acts against a child may include sexual contact, exposing one’s private areas, communicating indecent language, or any indecent conduct done in the presence of the child or using communication technology that amounts to sexual immorality.

Indecent conduct through the use of communication technology is of particular concern in today’s society given the digital age in which we live. Young people often meet and communicate online where it can be difficult to confirm someone’s true age. Service members must be diligent to ensure that their online communications are only with consenting adults and are otherwise not discrediting to the military.

Article 120c (Other Sexual Misconduct)

Serving as a final “catch-all” for sexual misconduct, Article 120c prohibits a service member from engaging in (1) indecent viewing, visual recording, or broadcasting; (2) forcible pandering; and (3) indecent exposure, each explained below.

Indecent viewing, visual recording, or broadcasting prohibit a service member from wrongfully viewing the private area of another person, from wrongfully photographing or recording the private area of another person without their consent, or of wrongfully broadcasting or distributing such recording. Whether the viewing, recording, or broadcast is illegal often hinges on whether the alleged victim had a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Forcible pandering occurs when a service member compels another person to engage in an act of prostitution with someone else. Acts of prostitution occur when there is a sexual act or sexual contact where value is given to, or received by, any person.

Indecent exposure occurs when a person intentionally exposes, in an indecent manner, their genitalia, anus, buttocks, or female areola or nipple. There are three elements to this offense: (1) That the accused exposed his/her genitalia, anus, buttocks, or female areola or nipple; (2) That the exposure was in an indecent manner; and (3) that the exposure was intentional. “Indecent manner” means “conduct that amounts to a form of immorality relating to sexual impurity which is grossly vulgar, obscene, and repugnant to common propriety, and tends to excite sexual desire or deprave morals with respect to sexual relations.”

Article 120 Violations are "Covered Offenses"

Regardless of the offense charged, any Article 120 violation is considered a “covered offense” under the UCMJ due to its seriousness and will be reviewed by the Office of Special Trial Counsel (OSTC). Established by the FY22 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the OSTC is composed of specially trained military prosecutors who handle only serious criminal offenses. The OSTC has the authority to prosecute the following “covered offenses”:

• Article 117a, Wrongful Broadcast or Distribution of Intimate Visual Images
• Article 118, Murder
• Article 119, Manslaughter
• Article 119a, Death or Injury of an Unborn Child
• Article 120, Rape and Sexual Assault
• Article 120a, Mail, Deposit of Obscene Matter
• Article 120b, Rape and Sexual Assault of a Child
• Article 120c, Other Sexual Misconduct
• Article 125, Kidnapping
• Article 128b, Domestic Violence
• Article 130, Stalking
• Article 132, Retaliation
• Article 134, Child Pornography
• A conspiracy, solicitation, or attempt to commit a covered offense is also a covered offense.

The OSTC took effect on 27 December 2023 and now has jurisdiction with respect to covered offenses that occur after that date. When going up against the best prosecutors in the Department of Defense, service members facing court-martial need to have the very best legal defense representation.

Maximum Punishment

Violations under Articles 120b and 120c can carry significantly different penalties depending on the nature and seriousness of the charge. However, serious allegations almost always carry the possibility of significant confinement, dishonorable discharge, and mandatory sex offender registration.

Protect Your Freedom and Your Military Future

MJA has successfully defended service members facing investigation, court-martial, and discipline for the most serious offenses under the UCMJ, including allegations of sexual misconduct under Article 120. Here are some of the advantages of choosing our firm:

• Legal Expertise: When you hire us, you benefit from our extensive legal expertise and experience in military law. Our lawyers have in-depth knowledge of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and understand the complexities of military court-martial proceedings.
• Strategic Guidance: We provide strategic guidance tailored to your specific case. Our lawyers assess the details of your situation, identify potential legal defenses, and develop a customized defense strategy aimed at achieving the best possible outcome.
• Protecting Your Rights: As your legal representatives, we are dedicated to protecting your rights throughout the legal process. We ensure that you receive fair treatment and due process under military law, advocating on your behalf at every stage of the proceedings.
• Navigating Complex Procedures: Military court-martials involve complex procedures and rules that can be difficult to navigate without legal assistance. We guide you through the entire process, from pre-trial investigations to courtroom proceedings, ensuring that you understand your rights and obligations every step of the way.
• Evidence Gathering and Presentation: Our firm is skilled in gathering and presenting evidence to support your case effectively. We work diligently to uncover exculpatory evidence, challenge the prosecution's case, and present compelling arguments in your defense.
• Negotiating Plea Deals: In some cases, negotiating a plea deal may be the most advantageous option for minimizing the potential consequences of a conviction. We have experience negotiating with military prosecutors to secure favorable plea agreements when appropriate.
• Courtroom Representation: If your case goes to trial, our lawyers provide strong and effective courtroom representation. We are skilled litigators who advocate zealously for your interests, presenting your case persuasively to the court-martial panel or judge.
• Minimizing Penalties: If you are convicted of a military offense, our goal is to minimize the penalties you face. We work tirelessly to secure leniency in sentencing and explore options for rehabilitation, mitigating the impact of the conviction on your military career and future prospects.
• Emotional Support: Dealing with legal proceedings can be emotionally challenging, especially in cases involving serious allegations. We offer compassionate support and guidance throughout the process, helping you navigate the emotional aspects of your situation with empathy and understanding.
• Peace of Mind: By hiring us as your legal representatives, you can have peace of mind knowing that you have a dedicated team of professionals fighting for your rights and working toward the best possible outcome in your case. We are committed to providing you with the highest level of representation and support during this difficult time.

When your military career, future, and freedom are on the line, you need an experienced law firm in your corner. The attorneys at MJA have decades of experience and stand ready to fight for you. Contact one of our military defense lawyers today to learn more.

Article 120a is a largely unknown article of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) that criminalizes using the mail to send obscene materials. While we live in a digital age in which information is easily transmitted electronically, it is still a crime in the military to knowingly deposit or cause someone else to deposit in the mail certain inappropriate material. The consequences for doing so can be serious and life-changing.

When your military career, future, and freedom are on the line, you need an experienced law firm in your corner. The attorneys at MJA have decades of experience and have defended service members charged with some of the most serious offenses under the UCMJ. Contact one of our military defense lawyers today to learn more.

What is Considered Obscene under Article 120a, UCMJ?

To be guilty of violating Article 120a, UCMJ, the Government must prove three elements:

1. That the accused deposited or caused to be deposited in the mails certain matter for mailing and delivery;

2. That the act was done wrongfully and knowingly; and

3. That the matter was obscene.

Let’s break down the important definitions from those elements.

The most important definition to understand is the meaning of “obscene” material. Courts define “obscene” as that “form of immorality relating to sexual impurity which is grossly vulgar, obscene, and repugnant to common propriety, and tends to excite sexual desire or deprave morals with respect to sexual relations. Article 120a explains that whether something is obscene is a question of fact for the judge or jury to decide.

In addition to being of a sexually impure and deviant nature, the matter must violate community standards of decency or obscenity and must go beyond customary limits of expression. The community standards of decency or obscenity are to be judged according to a reasonable person in the military community as a whole, rather than the most prudish or the most tolerant members of the military community.

Finally, to prove a violation of Article 120a the government must show that the person’s actions were knowing and wrongful. “Knowingly” simply means the person deposited the material with knowledge of its nature. In other words, if a person mailed a package and reasonably believed that the contents of the package did not contain any obscene material, that could be a defense at trial. Knowingly depositing obscene matter in the mails is “wrongful” if it is done without legal justification or authorization.

Mailing Obscene Matter is a "Covered Offense"

The offense of mailing obscene matter has become even more serious in recent years given that it is now considered a “covered offense” under the UCMJ and will be reviewed by the Office of Special Trial Counsel (OSTC). Established by the FY22 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the OSTC is composed of specially trained military prosecutors who handle only serious criminal offenses. The OSTC has the authority to prosecute the following “covered offenses”:

• Article 117a, Wrongful Broadcast or Distribution of Intimate Visual Images
• Article 118, Murder
• Article 119, Manslaughter
• Article 119a, Death or Injury of an Unborn Child
• Article 120, Rape and Sexual Assault
• Article 120a, Mail, Deposit of Obscene Matter
• Article 120b, Rape and Sexual Assault of a Child
• Article 120c, Other Sexual Misconduct
• Article 125, Kidnapping
• Article 128b, Domestic Violence
• Article 130, Stalking
• Article 132, Retaliation
• Article 134, Child Pornography
• A conspiracy, solicitation, or attempt to commit a covered offense is also a covered offense.

The OSTC took effect on 27 December 2023 and now has jurisdiction with respect to covered offenses that occur after that date. When going up against the best prosecutors in the Department of Defense, service members facing court-martial need to have the very best legal defense representation.

Maximum Punishment

Mailing obscene materials is considered a Category 2 offense under the UCMJ that carries anywhere from 1-36 months of confinement, along with the possibility for a dishonorable discharge and total forfeitures of all pay and allowances.

Protect Your Freedom and Your Military Future

When your career, freedom, and future are on the line, you need an experienced law firm in your corner that will zealously fight for you. MJA has defended service members facing investigation, court-martial, and discipline for the most serious offenses under the UCMJ and will ensure that every avenue of defense is aggressively pursued on your behalf.

Here are some of the advantages of choosing our firm:

• Legal Expertise: When you hire us, you benefit from our extensive legal expertise and experience in military law. Our lawyers have in-depth knowledge of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and understand the complexities of military court-martial proceedings.
• Strategic Guidance: We provide strategic guidance tailored to your specific case. Our lawyers assess the details of your situation, identify potential legal defenses, and develop a customized defense strategy aimed at achieving the best possible outcome.
• Protecting Your Rights: As your legal representatives, we are dedicated to protecting your rights throughout the legal process. We ensure that you receive fair treatment and due process under military law, advocating on your behalf at every stage of the proceedings.
• Navigating Complex Procedures: Military court-martials involve complex procedures and rules that can be difficult to navigate without legal assistance. We guide you through the entire process, from pre-trial investigations to courtroom proceedings, ensuring that you understand your rights and obligations every step of the way.
• Evidence Gathering and Presentation: Our firm is skilled in gathering and presenting evidence to support your case effectively. We work diligently to uncover exculpatory evidence, challenge the prosecution's case, and present compelling arguments in your defense.
• Negotiating Plea Deals: In some cases, negotiating a plea deal may be the most advantageous option for minimizing the potential consequences of a conviction. We have experience negotiating with military prosecutors to secure favorable plea agreements when appropriate.
• Courtroom Representation: If your case goes to trial, our lawyers provide strong and effective courtroom representation. We are skilled litigators who advocate zealously for your interests, presenting your case persuasively to the court-martial panel or judge.
• Minimizing Penalties: If you are convicted of a military offense, our goal is to minimize the penalties you face. We work tirelessly to secure leniency in sentencing and explore options for rehabilitation, mitigating the impact of the conviction on your military career and future prospects.
• Emotional Support: Dealing with legal proceedings can be emotionally challenging, especially in cases involving serious allegations. We offer compassionate support and guidance throughout the process, helping you navigate the emotional aspects of your situation with empathy and understanding.
• Peace of Mind: By hiring us as your legal representatives, you can have peace of mind knowing that you have a dedicated team of professionals fighting for your rights and working toward the best possible outcome in your case. We are committed to providing you with the highest level of representation and support during this difficult time.

Contact MJA today for a free consultation. 

On September 30, 2025, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth announced a series of new directives aimed at strengthening military readiness and supporting U.S. warfighters as they train to fight and decisively win our nation’s battles. The new directives include changes to how the military handles allegations of discrimination and harassment within its ranks.

The recent changes were announced in a meeting with the nation’s most senior military officers during which Secretary Hegseth criticized “politically correct” policies that encouraged frivolous and anonymous complaints and placed service members in “legal limbo”, sidelining careers and detracting from mission accomplishment. Secretary of War Hegseth’s policies are sure to shake things up and provided greater protection against false and frivolous complaints.

Overview of the Secretary’s Reform Plan

On September 30, 2025, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth directed the Under Secretary of War for Personnel and Readiness (USW(P&R)) to “implement key reforms across the Department’s MEO and EEO programs to optimize organizational effectiveness, ensure readiness, and prevent abuse of process.” The directive was preceded by a comprehensive review of the Department of War’s MEO and EEO programs that occurred earlier this year.

Under the new directive, the Secretaries of the Military Departments are required to make changes regarding the handling of MEO/EEO complaints, the impact such complaints have on service members, and how commands can deal with false or frivolous complaints. At a minimum, the reforms must ensure that:

• Complaints are promptly (within 30 days) addressed and dismissed if they lack actionable, credible evidence;

• Favorable personnel actions such as awards, promotions, and retirements, involving alleged offenders are only withheld where a preliminary or subsequent investigation indicates that the complaint is likely to be substantiated; and

• Those who knowingly submit false complaints and repeatedly submit frivolous complaints are held accountable, pursuant to applicable laws and regulations.

Military Equal Opportunity (MEO) Reforms

While the MEO and EEO programs are important for preventing and responding to incidents of discrimination and harassment, there have long been concerns of the programs being weaponized to avoid accountability for poor performance or target unpopular leaders.

To combat these concerns, the reforms will replace the current anonymous reporting system with a confidential complaint reporting option to MEO Professionals. The new program will also provide mediation as a “first-line alternative” to filing a formal MEO Complaint. This is huge. Mediation will foster early conflict resolution and reduce the administrative burdens placed on service members and commands with lengthy investigations.

Under the new reforms, MEO complaints that lack sufficient merit to trigger an investigation will be systematically dismissed, and unsubstantiated complaints will be closed within 7 business days. To reinforce the integrity of the MEO complaint process, commanders will retain the right to prosecute false complainants for a violation of Article 107, UCMJ.

Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Reforms

Secretary Hegseth’s directive also implements a number of changes to the EEO program. This includes:

• Centralizing EEO Program Organization and Operations to ensure consistent application and timely resolution of complaints;

• Expediting Senior Official EEO Cases to avoid the indefinite suspension of careers for allegations affecting general/flag officers and senior executives;

• Centralizing EEO Investigations to increase oversight and standardize policy implementation;

• Dismissing EEO Complaints when the complainant fails to provide relevant information or documentation upon request; and

• Establishing Compliance Measures to Track EEO Reform Actions.

Defending Against MEO and EEO Complaints

While these changes are certainly a huge step in the right direction, the new reforms are not a guarantee to prevent false or frivolous MEO and EEO complaints.

Service members facing a complaint must understand that the decisions they make while under investigation—and what they choose to say or not say—will directly impact their likelihood for success. Here are three fundamental rights you can, and should, invoke:

Right to counsel. Service members suspected of violating the UCMJ, which includes alleged violations of military MEO and EEO policies, have the absolute right to consult with an attorney, military or civilian, before waiving their rights. It is crucial to consult with an attorney if you are suspected of an offense. Remember that no matter the specific legal circumstances you are facing, you are entitled to legal counsel and should utilize it.

Based on the circumstances of your case, an attorney may be able to identify a defense to the allegations. Some of the most common defenses include:

• False accusations or accusations with ulterior motives;
• Lack of evidence;
• Reasonable mistake of fact;
• Failure of due process;
• Alibi;
• Entrapment or coercion;
• Expired statute of limitations for prosecution; or
• Mistaken identity.

Right to remain silent. Service members have an absolute right to remain silent if questioned about a suspected UCMJ violation. Providing a statement to law enforcement almost never helps and may result in additional charges. If the statement you make is different from that of the alleged victim, you may be charged with making a false official statement or obstructing justice. “Cooperating” with law enforcement won’t prevent the military from taking adverse action against you–it just makes the government’s case stronger.

Right to refuse consent. There is also no obligation to consent to any search or seizure of your person or property. If investigators have probable cause to believe that there is evidence of a crime in a certain location, they must obtain an authorization from your commander before conducting a search. Absent probable cause, the only way law enforcement can search or seize your property is with your consent. Providing consent gives law enforcement the right to search your phone, vehicle, residence, or person for evidence which they intend to use against you. Don’t be fooled.

Protect Your Freedom and Your Military Future

When your military career, future, and freedom are on the line, you need an experienced law firm in your corner. The attorneys at MJA have decades of experience and have defended service members charged with some of the most serious offenses under the UCMJ, including allegations of discrimination and harassment. Contact one of our military defense lawyers today to learn more.

September 15, 2025 – Press Release

MJA is pleased to welcome Amy N. Thomas to the firm’s military and administrative law practices. Thomas brings over two decades of distinguished military legal experience and federal employment law expertise to MJA. A retired Lieutenant Colonel in the United States Marine Corps, Thomas combines exceptional trial advocacy skills with deep administrative law knowledge and strategic command-level legal counsel experience.

“We could not be more pleased that Amy has joined the firm,” said Gerald Healy, founding partner and owner of MJA. “Amy’s broad military experience and expertise in federal employment litigation will make her an invaluable asset to our clients and to our administrative and military law practices.”

Before joining MJA, Thomas served 22 years in the Marine Corps, culminating her military career as Deputy Staff Judge Advocate at Marine Forces Reserve, where she provided comprehensive legal guidance to a three-star command across all aspects of military law. In this senior leadership role, she advised command leadership on complex legal matters affecting reserve operations and military personnel across multiple installations around the US and worldwide.

Throughout her military tenure, Thomas developed extensive trial experience serving as both government counsel and defense counsel in federal criminal proceedings. Her courtroom advocacy encompasses a broad spectrum of federal criminal matters, demonstrating her versatility and deep understanding of both prosecution and defense strategies.

Thomas also possesses comprehensive experience in military administrative law, having handled numerous enlisted administrative separation boards and officer boards of inquiry. This background provides her with unique insight into personnel matters, due process requirements, and administrative adjudication procedures that will translate effectively across a civilian military law practice.

Most recently, Thomas served as a labor and employment attorney with the Defense Health Agency, where she led the DHA Office of General Counsel Investigation’s Cell. In this role, she was primarily responsible for investigating allegations of employee misconduct and recommending appropriate adjudicatory measures to DHA leadership. This position required sophisticated analysis of employment law issues, investigative methodology, and strategic recommendations for complex personnel matters.

Thomas earned her Juris Doctor from Louisiana State University School of Law in 2005 and subsequently obtained a Master’s in Jurisprudence in Labor and Employment Law (MJ-LEL) from Tulane University School of Law in May 2022. She is admitted to practice in the state of Louisiana.

Unlawful Command Influence (UCI) is often referred to as the “mortal enemy of military justice”—and for good reason. When a commander crosses the line between leadership and interference, the fairness of the entire legal process is at risk. For active-duty service members facing court-martial or administrative action, the presence of UCI can mean the difference between justice served and rights violated.

At Military Justice Attorneys, we know how military justice is supposed to work—and we recognize the signs when it doesn’t. Our veteran attorneys have defended service members across all branches of the armed forces. We’ve seen firsthand how command pressure can taint investigations, influence decisions, and damage careers.

What Is Unlawful Command Influence?

Under Article 37 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), it is unlawful for a commanding officer to use their authority to directly or indirectly influence the outcome of a military judicial proceeding. This includes pressuring subordinates to:

• Reach a certain verdict at a court-martial
• Prefer charges without a sufficient basis
• Recommend a specific punishment
• Deny clemency or parole
• Avoid granting immunity or witness access to the defense

UCI undermines the core values of the military justice system: fairness, due process, and impartiality. Even the appearance of influence can be enough to trigger a UCI challenge and possibly derail a case.

Real-World Examples of UCI

Unlawful Command Influence is not just a theoretical concern—it has been the basis for numerous overturned convictions and judicial inquiries. In recent years, there have been high-profile cases where general officers made comments that appeared to sway the outcome of sexual assault trials—causing serious concerns, legal appeals, and even mistrials. One example is United States v. Barry, where a Navy rear admiral made inappropriate comments to the general court-martial convening authority reviewing the case, resulting in UCI. As a result, the CAAF set aside the findings and sentence and dismissed the charge with prejudice. 

How Does UCI Affect a Case?

If UCI is proven or even credibly alleged, the government must show beyond a reasonable doubt that the proceedings were not tainted. This is a high burden. When they fail, it can result in:

• Dismissal of charges
• Reversal of convictions on appeal
• Suppression of evidence
• Reassignment of military judges or panel members

For service members, that means a second chance at a fair trial or dismissal of the case altogether.

What to Do If You Suspect UCI

If you believe that command influence has affected your case or investigation, speaking with an experienced military defense attorney is essential. Some signs of UCI include:

• Unusual pressure to accept nonjudicial punishment
• Commanders publicly expressing desired outcomes
• Denied access to witnesses or evidence
• An unusually fast track from investigation to court-martial

The earlier your legal team can raise the issue, the better your rights will be protected.

Why Legal Experience Matters

Proving UCI requires more than a gut feeling—it requires a detailed understanding of military law, procedure, and command structure. At Military Justice Attorneys, we’ve represented active-duty service members at every stage of the military justice process. We know how to investigate allegations of UCI, build strong legal defenses, and demand accountability when command oversteps its role.

We’re not intimidated by rank and won’t back down when your rights are on the line.

Protect Your Future. Defend Your Rights.

Unlawful Command Influence can threaten the fairness of your case, but it doesn’t have to decide the outcome. If you’re facing a court-martial or believe command interference is compromising your defense, contact Military Justice Attorneys. We’ll evaluate your case, identify potential UCI issues, and fight to protect your constitutional and statutory rights.

You serve your country with honor. We’re here to serve you with the same commitment.

If you received a discharge characterization that doesn’t reflect your service or circumstances, you’re not alone or without options. Whether you were discharged with a General, Other Than Honorable (OTH), or Bad Conduct Discharge, there is a path toward restoring your record and reputation. At Military Justice Attorneys, we help service members and veterans fight for the recognition they deserve by pursuing discharge upgrades through the appropriate military review boards.

Why Your Discharge Status Matters

Your discharge characterization can significantly impact your life after the military. It affects your access to VA benefits, GI Bill eligibility, healthcare, employment opportunities, and reputation. A less-than-Honorable discharge can follow you for years, even if it resulted from a minor incident or an unfair decision. That’s why a discharge upgrade is worth exploring.

Who Can Request a Discharge Upgrade?

Anyone separated from the military with a characterization less than “Honorable” may request an upgrade. This includes individuals discharged with:

• General (Under Honorable Conditions)
• Other Than Honorable (OTH)
• Bad Conduct Discharge (issued by special court-martial)
• Dishonorable Discharge (issued by general court-martial)

However, it’s important to understand that Dishonorable and Bad Conduct discharges issued through a court-martial are extremely difficult to upgrade. In these cases, your application may require a successful appeal through the military appellate courts before requesting relief from a review board.

Where and How Do You Apply?

There are two main avenues for seeking a discharge upgrade:

1. Discharge Review Board (DRB) – This board reviews most discharge upgrade requests that do not involve a court-martial. You must submit your application within 15 years of separation. The DRB does not have the authority to change the underlying reason for discharge related to a court-martial conviction.
2. Board for Correction of Military Records (BCMR or BCNR) – This board reviews more complex cases, including those beyond the 15-year deadline or those involving court-martial convictions. It can also correct errors or injustices not handled by the DRB.

Both boards allow applicants to request a records review or a personal hearing (in-person or virtual) to present additional evidence and arguments.

What Are Your Chances of Success?

Every case is different, but success largely depends on the strength of your supporting evidence and the reasons for your request. To improve your chances, you’ll need to:

• Demonstrate “Propriety” or “Equity” – Show that the discharge was either factually or legally incorrect (improper), or that it was too harsh or inconsistent with current policies (inequitable).
• Provide Evidence of Post-Service Conduct – If applicable, showing rehabilitation, employment history, or community involvement can support your case.
• Highlight Policy Changes – In recent years, the DoD has issued guidance encouraging review boards to give “liberal consideration” to veterans who have PTSD, TBI, or related mental health conditions that may have contributed to misconduct.

At Military Justice Attorneys, we know how to build a compelling case based on the facts, service history, medical documentation, and legal standards. Our attorneys are veterans themselves, and we understand how these discharges affect real lives.

Why Legal Representation Matters

You only get one shot at making a first impression with the board. While it’s possible to apply independently, many applications are denied due to missing documentation, weak arguments, or failure to link the misconduct to mitigating factors. An experienced military attorney can help craft a persuasive narrative, gather the proper evidence, and present your case clearly and effectively.

Take the Next Step

If you believe your discharge status was unfair, unjust, or no longer reflects who you are today, don’t wait to explore your options. A discharge upgrade won’t erase the past, but can open doors to a better future.

Contact Military Justice Attorneys to schedule a confidential consultation and let us help you fight for the record—and the recognition—you deserve.

Understanding the UCMJ: Core Principles and Structure

Military deployments come with a unique kind of pressure. You’re expected to perform at your best, follow orders, and keep your head on straight—even in the most unpredictable environments. But when the stakes are high and stress runs even higher, mistakes can happen. And if they do, the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) is the system that governs how those mistakes are handled.

Let’s break down how the UCMJ applies while deployed—and what you need to know if you’re facing accusations.

Key Articles of the UCMJ Relevant to Deployment

Some articles of the UCMJ come up more than others when you're in the field. Three in particular tend to carry the most weight: Article 15, Article 92, and Article 134.

Article 15 deals with non-judicial punishment. It’s a faster way for commanders to handle minor offenses without a full court-martial.
Article 92 covers failure to obey a lawful order or regulation—a big one when operational discipline is critical.
Article 134 is the catch-all for misconduct that isn’t covered elsewhere.

Violating any of these can trigger serious consequences: demotion, pay loss, or even a discharge. A non-judicial punishment might sound less severe, but it still leaves a mark on your record—and your future.

For deployed service members, knowing how these articles function in real-world situations is crucial. You may not have time to process what’s happening before action is taken. But that doesn’t mean you don’t have rights.

Know Your Rights Under the UCMJ

Even when you’re thousands of miles from home, you still have legal protections. Under the UCMJ, you have the right to remain silent, to be informed of the charges against you, and to call witnesses in your defense.

You also have the right to legal representation. That could mean working with a JAG attorney or bringing in a civilian defense lawyer—your call.

The sooner you connect with legal counsel, the better. Whether it's during the investigation phase or when you're presented with an Article 15, having someone who knows the system on your side makes a huge difference. Don’t wait until things spiral to get the help you need.

Navigating UCMJ Proceedings During Deployment

What Happens When You're Accused

If someone reports a violation, it kicks off a process that starts with an investigation. This could be something as small as a preliminary inquiry or as involved as a full-blown investigation depending on the situation.

Investigators gather evidence, talk to witnesses, and submit their findings. From there, your command decides what action—if any—will follow.

Now, being under investigation during deployment adds another layer of stress. Access to evidence or witnesses might be limited. You may be pulled away from duties to participate in interviews. It's not ideal—but the goal is to get the facts straight.

What to Know About Article 15 (NJP)

If you’re offered non-judicial punishment, you have a choice: accept it or demand a court-martial. That’s not a decision to make lightly. NJP can feel like the easier option, but it still carries penalties—extra duty, rank reduction, and pay loss are all on the table.

It can also follow you long after deployment ends. Commanders often lean on NJP in the field because it's quick and avoids dragging out disciplinary issues. But you still deserve time, support, and clarity before making any decisions.

Maintaining Discipline and Order During Deployment

Why Culture and Training Matter

It’s easy to think of UCMJ as just a list of rules, but enforcement is as much about culture as it is about code. Units that emphasize open communication, early conflict resolution, and consistent training tend to face fewer violations.

When you know what’s expected and feel supported, it’s easier to stay focused—and out of trouble. That’s why regular briefings and legal refreshers matter. They’re not just check-the-box tasks; they’re practical tools for avoiding real consequences.

Leadership Sets the Tone

Good leadership doesn’t just enforce the rules—it explains them, models them, and makes sure the whole team understands why they matter. When leaders handle discipline fairly and transparently, it reinforces trust throughout the ranks.

That trust pays off during deployment. Teams with strong leadership are better equipped to handle pressure, make decisions, and stay within the lines—even when things get messy.

Special Considerations for UCMJ During International Deployments

When Local Law and UCMJ Collide

Being overseas adds a twist: you’re not just accountable to the UCMJ—you’re also subject to the laws of the host country. That can create some confusing situations, especially if what’s allowed by UCMJ contradicts local rules.

Before you deploy, it’s worth brushing up on the host nation’s laws. And if you find yourself in legal hot water overseas, it’s critical to understand which jurisdiction is involved—and what your rights are.

Understanding SOFA Agreements

Status of Forces Agreements (SOFA) outline how U.S. military members interact with host nation legal systems. SOFAs cover everything from criminal jurisdiction to customs rules, and they vary depending on the country.

These agreements are designed to protect service members while respecting the sovereignty of the host nation. But they’re not a blanket shield. If you’re deployed, knowing the limits of SOFA protections can help you steer clear of unnecessary complications—and get support faster if something does happen.

Protect Your Career and Your Record—Even During Deployment

If you're facing a UCMJ investigation or Article 15 while deployed, it might feel like you're at a disadvantage. You’re dealing with mission stress, limited resources, and unfamiliar legal procedures. But you don’t have to face it alone.

Our team at Military Justice Attorneys has helped countless service members defend their careers and reputations in challenging environments—domestic and abroad. We understand the pressure you’re under, and we know how to fight for your rights.

Call (843) 773-5501 today to get support from experienced military defense counsel who understand your situation and can help you move forward with confidence.

The Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA) is a significant piece of legislation designed to protect active-duty military members from unfair financial and legal practices, including vehicle repossession. Despite these legal protections, some service members still face challenges when dealing with lenders and repossession agencies. Fortunately, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has consistently enforced SCRA provisions and reached favorable settlements for affected military members.

What Is the SCRA and How Does It Protect Against Vehicle Repossession?

The SCRA provides various legal and financial protections for active-duty service members, including safeguards against vehicle repossession. Under the SCRA, lenders cannot repossess a car without a court order if the loan was obtained before the service member entered active duty. This protection ensures that military members are not unfairly penalized for financial difficulties that arise due to their service commitments.

To legally repossess a vehicle, lenders must prove to a court that they followed SCRA regulations, including verifying whether the borrower is on active duty and obtaining the requisite court approval. Even in cases where the loan was obtained after enlistment, lenders must still comply with strict rules to ensure fairness.

DOJ Settlement Examples in Vehicle Repossession Cases

Over the years, the DOJ has stepped in to enforce SCRA protections and secure settlements for military personnel whose rights were violated. Here are a few notable examples of cases where the DOJ successfully intervened on behalf of service members:

1. Hyundai Capital America Case

In 2021, Hyundai Capital America was required to pay over $360,000 in damages after the DOJ determined it had illegally repossessed vehicles from service members without court orders. The company had failed to fully comply with SCRA requirements, and as a result, active-duty members were wrongfully deprived of their vehicles. The settlement offered compensation for affected individuals and reinforced the importance of SCRA compliance.

2. Westlake Services LLC Settlement

Westlake Services LLC and its subsidiary, Wilshire Consumer Credit, also faced legal action in a 2022 SCRA violation case. The DOJ found that Westlake had illegally repossessed vehicles from service members in at least 70 cases. The company ultimately agreed to compensate victims and implement new policies to prevent future violations.

3. Santander Consumer USA Agreement

The DOJ announced an agreement with Santander Consumer USA in a 2019 case involving the wrongful repossession of over 1,000 vehicles. Santander paid $9.35 million in settlements, highlighting the severity of the violations and the significant financial impact wrongful repossessions can have on military families.

These cases underscore how seriously the DOJ takes SCRA violations and the importance of lenders adhering to the law when dealing with service members.

How Does the SCRA Benefit Military Members?

SCRA protections against vehicle repossession are just one example of how the law is designed to safeguard military members' financial well-being. These protections serve several key purposes:

1. Preventing Financial Hardship

Active-duty service often requires service members to relocate frequently and manage deployments, making it difficult to keep up with financial obligations. By limiting lenders’ ability to repossess vehicles unfairly, the SCRA reduces the risk of financial hardship during periods of active duty.

2. Ensuring Fair Treatment by Lenders

The SCRA holds lenders accountable and requires them to act fairly when dealing with service members. This ensures that military personnel are not taken advantage of during their service to the nation.

3. Providing a Legal Avenue for Justice

When lenders violate SCRA protections, service members have a legal framework for recourse. DOJ settlements often include compensation for affected individuals, reinforcing the protections that the law is designed to provide.

4. Protecting Career Mobility

Losing a vehicle due to illegal repossession can disrupt a service member’s career and transportation needs. SCRA protections help safeguard against these disruptions, allowing them to fulfill their military duties without unnecessary stress.

What Should You Do If You Face Vehicle Repossession While on Active Duty?

If you are a service member facing vehicle repossession, taking immediate steps to protect your rights is essential. Here’s what to do:

1. Verify SCRA Coverage

Confirm whether your loan originated before or after entering active duty. If it was before, the repossession is almost certainly subject to SCRA protections.

2. Contact the Lender

Inform your lender of your active-duty status and remind them of their obligations under the SCRA.

3. Consult Legal Counsel

Contact an SCRA attorney to evaluate your situation and determine whether your rights have been violated.

4. Report to the DOJ

If you believe your lender has acted unlawfully, you can file a complaint with the DOJ's Service members and Veterans Initiative, which investigates SCRA violations.

Aggressive and Experienced Military Attorneys

If you or a loved one is facing an unlawful vehicle repossession while on active duty, you may have legal options under the SCRA. Military Justice Attorneys is dedicated to protecting the rights of service members and holding lenders accountable. Our experienced team can help you navigate SCRA protections and pursue the compensation and relief you deserve. Call (843) 773-5501 today for a free consultation.