Article 31b Rights: The Ultimate Guide for U.S. Service Members

LEGAL DISCLAIMER: This article provides general, informational content for educational purposes only. It is not a substitute for professional legal advice from a qualified attorney. Always consult with a lawyer for guidance on your specific legal situation, especially if you are a service member under investigation.

Imagine you're a civilian, and a police officer wants to question you about a crime. You probably know you have “the right to remain silent” thanks to TV shows. Now, imagine you're a soldier, sailor, airman, or Marine. In the military, the lines are blurrier. Your boss—your Sergeant or your Captain—can give you lawful orders. So, what happens when that same boss starts asking you questions about something you might have done wrong? How do you protect yourself without being accused of disobeying an order? This is precisely where Article 31b rights come in. Think of them as a custom-built suit of armor specifically designed for the unique pressures of military life. They are your absolute, non-negotiable shield against self-incrimination within the military justice system. They exist because the government recognizes that the power a commander has over a subordinate is immense, and without special protection, a service member could easily be pressured into confessing to something, even unintentionally. Understanding these rights isn't just a good idea; it is one of the most critical pieces of knowledge you can have to protect your career and your freedom while in uniform.

• Key Takeaways At-a-Glance:
• A Military-Specific Shield: Article 31b rights are a service member's protection against compulsory self-incrimination under the uniform_code_of_military_justice, and they are even broader than the famous civilian `miranda_rights`.
• Triggered by Suspicion: Your Article 31b rights apply whenever someone subject to the UCMJ suspects you of an offense and begins to ask you questions that might lead to an incriminating answer.
• Invoking is Not Insubordination: Clearly and respectfully stating that you are invoking your Article 31b rights and wish to speak with a lawyer is not a crime, is not an admission of guilt, and is the single most important action you can take to protect yourself.

Before 1951, the American military justice system was a fragmented and often inconsistent collection of rules called the “Articles of War.” Each branch had its own way of doing things, and the protections for individual service members could be weak. After World War II, with millions of citizens having served, Congress recognized the urgent need for a single, modern set of laws to govern the armed forces. The result was the uniform_code_of_military_justice (UCMJ), a revolutionary piece of legislation that, for the first time, codified the rights and legal procedures for all branches. At the very heart of this new code was Article 31. The lawmakers knew that the military environment was fundamentally different from civilian life. The inherent command structure, the pressure to obey orders, and the close-knit nature of units could create a coercive atmosphere. A service member might feel compelled to answer a superior's questions, fearing that silence would be seen as disrespect or disobedience. Article 31 was written to counteract this pressure directly. Specifically, section (b) of the article—what we now call Article 31b rights—mandated that before any questioning, a person suspected of an offense must be informed of the nature of the accusation, advised they have the right to remain silent, and warned that any statement they make can be used against them in a `court-martial`. This was a groundbreaking protection, established years before the Supreme Court's famous `miranda_v._arizona` decision applied similar rights to the civilian world.

The full text of Article 31(b) of the UCMJ, found in 10 U.S. Code § 831, is the bedrock of these protections. It states:

“(b) No person subject to this chapter may interrogate, or request any statement from, an accused or a person suspected of an offense without first informing him of the nature of the accusation and advising him that he does not have to make any statement regarding the offense of which he is accused or suspected and that any statement made by him may be used as evidence against him in a trial by court-martial.”

Let's translate that from legalese into plain English:

• “No person subject to this chapter…“: This means anyone in the military—from a Private to a General, an investigator from `ncis`, `cid`, or `osi`—is bound by this rule.
• ”…interrogate, or request any statement…“: This covers any form of questioning, formal or informal, intended to get an answer about a suspected crime.
• ”…from an accused or a person suspected of an offense…“: This is the trigger. The moment a military member officially suspects another of a UCMJ offense, the rights apply. It doesn't require a formal arrest.
• ”…without first informing him…“: The warning must come before the questioning begins.
• ”…of the nature of the accusation…“: They have to tell you what they think you did wrong (e.g., “I'm questioning you about a suspected larceny from the barracks.”).
• ”…he does not have to make any statement…“: This is your right to remain silent.
• ”…any statement made by him may be used as evidence against him…“: This is the consequence of waiving your rights.

While they sound similar, Article 31b and Miranda rights are not the same. Article 31b rights are, in many ways, more protective of the individual. Understanding the difference is crucial for any service member.

Your Article 31b rights are best understood as a three-part shield. The warning you receive will contain these three distinct elements.

Before a single question about an offense is asked, the questioner must tell you what specific offense you are suspected of committing. This is not optional.

• Why it Matters: This prevents “fishing expeditions.” An investigator or commander can't just bring you into a room and start asking vague, intimidating questions to see if you'll confess to something. They have to put their cards on the table. It allows you to understand the gravity of the situation and make an informed decision about whether to speak.
• Example: A Master Sergeant calls an Airman into his office.
  • Incorrect: “Airman Jones, I'm going to ask you some questions about your conduct. You'd better be straight with me.” (This is improper because the nature of the accusation is missing).
  • Correct: “Airman Jones, I am questioning you because you are suspected of violating Article 92, dereliction of duty, for failing to properly secure the communications gear last night. I am now advising you of your rights under Article 31b.”

This is the most famous right. You have the absolute right to say nothing. You do not have to answer any questions or make any statement, written or oral.

• Why it Matters: Your silence cannot be used against you as evidence of guilt in a `court-martial`. In the high-pressure military environment, it's natural to want to “explain yourself” or “clear things up.” This is almost always a mistake. Law enforcement and commanders are trained to elicit information. Your best strategy is to remain silent until you have spoken to a lawyer.
• Example: After being read her rights regarding a suspected unauthorized absence (UA), a Sailor is asked by an `ncis` agent, “Can you just tell us where you were on Tuesday? It'll be easier if you cooperate.” The Sailor can, and should, respond: “I am invoking my right to remain silent.”

This is the consequence. The questioner must explicitly warn you that anything you say—any admission, denial, or explanation—can and will be used as evidence in a military trial.

• Why it Matters: This highlights the seriousness of the situation. It's a clear signal that the conversation is no longer a casual chat; it is an official inquiry where your words have legal weight. Many service members think they can talk their way out of trouble, but they often end up providing the very evidence needed to convict them.
• Example: A Marine Gunnery Sergeant suspects a Corporal of damaging government property. After explaining the accusation and the right to silence, he must also state, “You need to understand that if you do decide to make a statement, it can be used as evidence against you in a trial by court-martial.”

• The Suspected Service Member: This is you. Your only goal is to protect your rights and your future. Your only “play” is to invoke your rights and ask for a lawyer.
• The Questioner: This can be anyone subject to the UCMJ.
  • Your Chain of Command (NCOs/Officers): They may be conducting a preliminary inquiry. The power dynamic is intense, but the law is clear: they must provide the warning if they suspect you of an offense.
  • Military Criminal Investigators (`cid`, `ncis`, `osi`, `cgis`): These are the professional detectives of the armed forces. They are highly trained in interrogation techniques. They may seem friendly or try to be your “buddy,” but their sole job is to gather evidence for a criminal prosecution.
• Military Defense Counsel: These are uniformed lawyers from the `judge_advocate_general`'s Corps who are independent of the command and law enforcement. Their job is to represent and defend service members. Their services are free. They are your most important ally. They are known by different names in different branches (Trial Defense Service in the Army, Defense Service Office in the Navy/Marines, Area Defense Counsel in the Air Force).

If you ever find yourself in a situation where you believe you are being questioned about a potential UCMJ offense, your adrenaline will be pumping. Stay calm and follow these steps precisely.

The warning bells should go off in your head the moment a superior or an investigator starts asking questions that aren't about normal, everyday duties.

• Red Flags:
  • “Can you tell me where you were last Friday night?”
  • “We need to talk about what happened in the barracks.”
  • “Did you have the watch during the time the equipment went missing?”
  • “I'm hearing rumors about you and…”
• If they read you a formal rights warning (often from a form like the DA Form 3881), the situation is undeniably serious. But remember, the requirement to warn you kicks in even before they pull out the form, at the moment of suspicion.

You must state your intention clearly. Do not be ambiguous. Use these exact or similar words, spoken calmly and respectfully.

• The Magic Words:
  • “I am invoking my right to remain silent under Article 31b.”
  • “I want to speak with a lawyer.”
  • “I do not consent to a search of my property/person.” (This is a related but separate `fourth_amendment` right).
• Once you ask for a lawyer, all questioning must stop immediately until you have a lawyer present. They cannot legally try to convince you to change your mind.

You will almost certainly be asked to sign a waiver, like the DA Form 3881 (Rights Warning Procedure/Waiver Certificate). This form documents that you were read your rights and asks if you understand them and are willing to waive them to answer questions.

• You have no obligation to sign the waiver portion. You can, and should, decline to sign the waiver. You can initial the part that says you understand your rights, but do not sign the part that says you agree to give them up.
• Simply state, “I understand my rights, but I do not wish to waive them. I will not answer questions, and I want a lawyer.”

After you have invoked your rights, do not talk about the situation with anyone except your lawyer.

• Do not talk to your roommate, your fire team leader, your friends, or your family. They could be called as witnesses against you.
• Do not post about it on social media. Investigators monitor social media.
• The only confidential and legally privileged communication you have is with your attorney.

As soon as you can, contact your installation's defense counsel office (TDS, DSO, or ADC).

• Their services are free and confidential.
• They can advise you, represent you during questioning, and defend you if you are charged.
• Do this immediately. Do not wait for things to “blow over.”

• DA Form 3881 (Army) / NAVMC 11090 (Marine Corps) / AF Form 1168 (Air Force): These are different branch versions of the “Rights Warning” form.
  • Purpose: To create a written record that a suspect was properly advised of their rights before questioning.
  • What to Do: Read it carefully. It will list the rights we've discussed. It will then ask you to sign a “Waiver.” Do not sign the waiver. Signing it means you are voluntarily giving up your constitutional and statutory rights. You can state that you understand your rights but refuse to sign the waiver.
• Consent to Search Form: Investigators may ask you to sign a form giving them consent to search your room, car, phone, or computer.
  • Purpose: To get you to voluntarily waive your fourth_amendment right against unreasonable searches.
  • What to Do: Do not sign it. Politely state, “I do not consent to a search.” This forces them to either stop or to get proper authorization (a search warrant or command authorization), which requires a higher legal standard.

• The Backstory: An Air Force service member, Tempia, was suspected of a crime. He was brought to the Office of Special Investigations (OSI) for questioning. He was in an OSI office, surrounded by investigators, and questioned for hours. He was given his Article 31b warning but was not told he had the right to a lawyer. He eventually confessed.
• The Legal Question: Does a military member who is undergoing custodial interrogation have a right to be informed of their right to counsel, similar to the civilian Miranda ruling?
• The Court's Holding: The U.S. Court of Military Appeals (the highest military court, now called the CAAF) ruled yes. It essentially incorporated the principles of `miranda_v._arizona` into military law. The court held that when a service member is in a custodial setting, the Article 31b warning alone is not enough. They must also be told they have the right to an attorney.
• Impact on You Today: This is why when you are read your rights by military investigators, the warning is often called a “Tempia Warning” or “Article 31b/Tempia Rights.” It's a combination of the UCMJ's right to silence and the court-mandated right to counsel.

• The Backstory: Two airmen were roommates. One, Duga, was telling the other about how he had committed a robbery. The roommate wasn't acting on behalf of law enforcement; he was just having a conversation. Later, the roommate reported Duga's confession.
• The Legal Question: Does Article 31b apply to a casual conversation between two service members when one of them is not acting in an official law enforcement or command capacity? Is every service member required to read another their rights before discussing a potential offense?
• The Court's Holding: The court said no. They clarified that Article 31b is not triggered unless the questioning is done by someone in an official capacity or when the situation is such that the suspect might feel compelled to answer due to the questioner's superior rank or position. A casual, unofficial conversation doesn't count.
• Impact on You Today: This case draws a critical line. While your NCO asking you questions in his office requires a warning, your buddy asking you what you did last night does not. However, this is why you never talk about your case with anyone, because a “friend” can always become a witness.

The biggest challenge to Article 31b rights today comes from technology.

• Text Messages and Social Media: Is a Sergeant texting a Private, “Hey, heard you got into a fight downtown. What happened?” considered an interrogation that requires a rights warning? Military courts are grappling with these questions. The informal nature of digital communication blurs the line between a casual chat and official questioning.
• Government vs. Personal Devices: The data on your government-issued phone or computer generally has a lower expectation of privacy. However, investigators often want access to your personal phone. Asking for your password or to “just take a quick look” is a request for a statement and a search. You have the right to refuse both.

As technology and communication methods evolve, so too will the law surrounding Article 31b.

• The Definition of “Questioning”: Expect to see more court cases that define what constitutes “interrogation” in the digital age. A “like” on an incriminating social media post, a reply in a group chat, or even data from a fitness tracker could all become subjects of legal battles.
• Increased Awareness: As information becomes more accessible, service members are becoming more aware of their rights. This may lead to more invocations of rights, forcing the military justice system to rely more on independent investigation rather than confessions. The core principle will remain: Article 31b rights are your personal shield, and only you can choose to lower it. The wise service member never does so without their lawyer by their side.

• article_15: A form of non-judicial punishment (NJP) used for minor offenses.
• court-martial: A military criminal trial.
• fifth_amendment: The U.S. Constitutional amendment that provides the right against self-incrimination for all citizens.
• interrogation: Questioning that is designed or likely to elicit an incriminating response.
• judge_advocate_general: The branch of military lawyers (JAGs) who can serve as prosecutors, defense counsel, or legal advisors.
• jurisdiction: The legal authority to hear a case and enforce laws.
• miranda_rights: The rights afforded to civilians during custodial interrogation.
• non-judicial_punishment: A disciplinary hearing before a commander, also known as NJP or an Article 15.
• self-incrimination: The act of implicating oneself in a crime.
• statute_of_limitations: The time limit within which legal proceedings must be initiated.
• subpoena: A legal order to compel testimony or the production of evidence.
• uniform_code_of_military_justice: The federal law that constitutes the American military justice system.

• fourth_amendment_rights_in_the_military
• non-judicial_punishment
• court-martial_process
• search_and_seizure_(military)
• uniform_code_of_military_justice
• miranda_rights
• role_of_the_judge_advocate_general