desertion definition government

10 U.S. Code § 885 - Art. 85. Desertion

In subsection (a), the word “unit” is substituted for the words “place of service” to conform to clause (2) of this section and section 886(3) of this title . The word “proper” is omitted as surplusage.

In subsection (b), the word “commissioned” is inserted for clarity. The word “before” is substituted for the words “prior to”. The words “its acceptance” are substituted for the words “the acceptance of the same”. The words “after tender of” are substituted for the words “having tendered” for clarity. The word “due” is omitted as surplusage.

In subsection (c), the words “attempt to desert” are substituted for the words “attempted desertion”.

• Why Choose Aaron Meyer Law?
• Military Rule of Evidence 613 – Prior Inconsistent Statements
• Military Rule of Evidence 404 (B)
• General Court-Martial Defense
• Special Court-Martial Defense
• Boards for Correction of Military Records
• Military Administrative Separation Lawyer
• Air Force Bases
• Coast Guard Bases
• Marine Corps Bases
• UCMJ Article 15 Defense Lawyer
• UCMJ Article 134
• UCMJ Article 32: Preliminary Hearing
• UCMJ Article 90: Assaulting or Disobeying a Superior Officer
• UCMJ Article 107: False Official Statements
• UCMJ Article 112: Drunk on Duty
• UCMJ Article 120: Rape & Sexual Assault
• UCMJ Article 121: Larceny
• UCMJ Article 125: Sodomy
• UCMJ Article 128: Assault
• UCMJ Article 133: Conduct Unbecoming an Officer
• UCMJ Article 138: Complaints of Wrongs
• UCMJ Article 132: Frauds Against the United States
• UCMJ Article 89: Disrespect Offenses
• UCMJ Article 92: Failure to Obey an Order
• UCMJ Article 31: Compelled to Incriminate Yourself
• UCMJ Article 80: Murder
• Domestic Violence
• Drug Crimes
• Theft & White Collar Crimes
• Violent Crimes
• Personal Injury
• Consumer Assistance
• Testimonials

Call For A Consultation 949-388-3654

UCMJ Article 85: Desertion

Military desertion is a concept as old as organized armies themselves. It is one that is taken extremely seriously by the authorities. “Desertion” refers to the act of a service member leaving their post or unit without permission and with the intent to remain away permanently. There are documented cases of desertion from United States military units dating back to the Revolutionary War. US soldiers have been executed on desertion charges as recently as World War II. Desertion is still considered an extremely serious offense under modern military codes. It remains punishable by harsh penalties such as imprisonment, dishonorable discharge, and forfeiture of pay.

Today, desertion is defined for United States military personnel under the Uniform Code of Military Justice ( UCMJ ) Article 85. This section of the UCMJ outlines the offense of desertion. It also specifies the circumstances under which a service member can be charged with it.

“Aaron takes his work very seriously and ultimately gave me back my faith in the legal system and that justice can and will prevail if you stick to your guns!…I would recommend him to anyone looking for who I consider to be one of the best damn Defense Attorneys around!” – J.E., former client

A service member must do the following to be charged with desertion:

• Demonstrate a specific intent to deliberately abandon their duties.
• Take affirmative steps to leave their post or unit without proper authorization.
• Act against their orders with the intention of abandoning their post, unit, or duties permanently.

If you are facing charges of desertion, it is essential to consult with a qualified attorney who has experience in military law.

In a desertion case, a skilled criminal defense attorney can assist the accused party in a variety of ways:

• Help you understand the charges against you.
• Explain the differences between military and civilian charges.
• Outline all the potential consequences.
• Challenge the evidence brought against you.
• Make the argument that you did not demonstrate a provable intent to desert your post.
• Explore all your legal options and use them to develop a powerful defense strategy.
• Protect your legal rights.
• Minimize the impact of desertion charges on your career and personal life.

Desertion vs. AWOL

Desertion and Absent Without Leave ( AWOL ) are two related but distinct offenses under military law. Both involve the unauthorized absence of a service member. However, there are important differences between the two charges.

AWOL, also sometimes called Unauthorized Absence (UA), refers to a situation where a service member is absent from their duty station or leaves their unit without proper authorization. However, they have not demonstrated a clear intent to abandon their duties permanently. In short, the service member left without permission, but they likely intend to return to their post or unit. Sneaking off base for a single evening to attend an unauthorized event would be an example of going AWOL. Depending on the length of the absence and the circumstances, AWOL can be punished in several ways, including:

• Confinement
• Forfeiture of pay
• Reduction in rank

Desertion also involves the unauthorized absence of a service member. However, they have already demonstrated a clear intention to leave the military and abandon their duties permanently, or at least indefinitely. To be charged with desertion, the accused service member must have taken affirmative steps to leave without obtaining proper authorization. Due to its permanent nature, desertion is a more serious offense than going AWOL or UA. It is punishable by severe penalties, including:

• Imprisonment
• Dishonorable discharge
• Forfeiture of pay and allowances

Each of these terms has a clear definition with distinct differences. However, the real-world, practical distinction between AWOL and desertion can be a fine line in many cases. For one, the exact circumstances of each case can vary greatly, even within the distinct categories of desertion and AWOL. Although military courts streamline many aspects of the civilian legal process, they cannot eliminate complexity and nuance.

What Is Considered Desertion in the Military?

Desertion is a serious offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). It is defined under UCMJ Article 85 as the unauthorized absence of a service member with the intent to remain away permanently in avoidance of their mandated service. To prove desertion, the government must show that the accused had a specific intent to abandon their duties with no intent to return. They must also demonstrate that they planned such an action and took affirmative steps to leave without proper authorization.

Under UCMJ Article 85, there are three specific categories of desertion. Each has different criteria for proving the offense and different potential consequences:

• Desertion Prior to the Start of a Military Operation: The accused flees their unit while that unit has been called to engage in a military operation and is preparing for said deployment. To prosecute this type of desertion, the government must show that the accused left their unit or post. They must also demonstrate the intent to remain away permanently when called to engage in a military operation.
• Desertion During a Military Operation: The accused left their post with the intent to remain away permanently while their unit was actively engaged in a military operation. This is one of the more serious offenses possible under the military code. However, due to the mental, physical, and emotional stresses of being involved in active military engagements, it has also unfortunately been a regular occurrence throughout history.
• Desertion With Aggravating Circumstances: In this type of desertion case, the government prosecutor must show that the accused left their unit with the intent to remain away permanently. The difference here is that they will also try to prove that the accused’s absence resulted in serious, demonstrable danger to their fellow service members or to the mission. They may also attempt to show that the accused employed violence or coercion while carrying out their desertion.

What Is the Punishment for Desertion?

Desertion in any of its forms is a serious offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). It is thus punishable by harsh penalties for United States service members. The severity of the punishment will depend on the particular circumstances of the offense and the type of desertion committed.

Some of the more common punishment mechanisms for deserters in the US military can include:

• Dishonorable discharge from military service (will affect your ability to access important benefits for veterans in the future)
• Forfeiture of pay and allowances (may be ordered as a partial forfeiture or may apply to your entire paycheck)
• Confinement/imprisonment

In the most severe cases, the maximum possible punishment will be:

• Total forfeiture of all pay and allowances
• Confinement for life

In addition to criminal penalties, a service member convicted of desertion may also face significant indirect consequences. These include:

• Loss of veteran’s benefits
• Difficulty finding employment
• Damage to their reputation and future career prospects

Aaron Meyer Law Can Help

If you are facing charges of desertion (or AWOL), you should consult with the highly qualified team at Aaron Meyer Law. We have broad experience in military, civil, and criminal law . We can become your close partner as you move through the next steps of the process. These steps will include:

• Understanding the charges against you and their possible consequences
• Analyzing all available evidence
• Exploring the full range of legal tools and tactics at your disposal
• Building a strong defense strategy to protect your legal rights
• Taking that strategy to court and deploying it effectively
• Minimizing the impact of any charges on your career and personal life

For assistance with all the above, contact our offices for a no-judgment review of your case today.

• Practice Areas

" * " indicates required fields

Active Duty Military Defense Attorney

Happy Customer

“I strongly and enthusiastically endorse Aaron Meyer in all matters involving litigation. I personally worked with Aaron on complex and time consuming felony level cases. What impressed me the most about Aaron was his tenacity in the court room and his undying loyalty for his client and the integrity of…

“The best litigator I’ve seen. No more explanation needed.”

Colby Vokey, Lieutenant Colonel, USMC (Ret.), Military Lawyer in Dallas, Texas

“Fearless and smart. Aggressive and tireless. There isn’t a better trial lawyer in any military courtroom. He fights. And wins. I would have defend me or my kids without hesitation. Has developed a superior reputation as a top litigator. Judges respect him. Prosecutor fear and dread him. Simply put- he…

Christopher Hibbard

“Hands down the best attorney anybody can ask for.”

A.M.R., client

“I’ve been a U.S. Marines for almost 18 years, during this time I’ve served four combat tours, have been highly decorated for my achievements, and received a Purple Heart for actions in combat. Despite my honorable service, in September 2009-November 2013, I would be placed under investigation and eventually go…

“If you want the best result, you need the best attorney.”

R.D., former client

“In 2010, I was falsely accused of a crime I didn’t commit and was in desperate need of legal counsel who was passionate in defending the innocent and who knew how to expertly present my case with salient facts gathered through exhaustive research. Aaron Meyer did just that and was…

Betsy R., parent of former client

Thank you my Angel for believing in my son and defending him with all of your might and obtaining the justice that he deserved.”

That’s when Capt. Meyer came into our lives. He took my son’s case, believed in him, worked, and investigated every aspect of the case. Turning every stone, not leaving one detail behind, Capt Meyer was not only able to stop his other than honorable discharge, he was able to get…

“I met Captain Meyer in 2010. My son was an active duty US Marine stationed in Camp Pendleton. Upon his return from Iraq, my son was suffering from PTSD and TBI. Even though, his command was aware of his health condition, they offered him no mental health treatment. During the…

Marine Corps’ Regional Defense Counsel – West Coast

“A rare talent in the courtroom. His cross examination skills are nearly unrivaled. He represents clients fearlessly and works tirelessly on their behalf. He loves his clients and fellow defense counsel and he pursues his cases with a level of dedication that is inspiring.”

Jeff Thomas

“Exceptional. Hardworking and competent. Thank you.”

A.R., former client

“Aaron Meyer is a lawyer dedicated to his clients 100% of the time. His compassion for you and ability to look at you as innocent until proven guilty gives him the strength to fight and not quit. His devotion goes above and beyond. He met with me day and night,…

Whitney Scott

“There are no words to properly express what this attorney brings to the table.”

Carlos O., Former Client

“When I first got the news that I was going to a court martial I was really worried. My assigned lawyer was incompetent and rude. When I asked for a new lawyer a high-ranking lawyer in the Marine Corps recommended Aaron Meyer who was starting to make a name for…

Senior Defense Counsel, Marine Corps’ Base Camp Pendleton

“He is clearly the best trial or defense counsel that I have observed in the courtroom due to his creativity and dedication working 12+ hour days, weekends, and holidays to ensure his clients received the best possible results.”

“Aaron is a great lawyer! Without his help my family wouldn’t be the same! Thank you!”

Jerry E., parent of former client

“My son who had over 16 years in the U.S.M.C. with the rank of Gunnery Sergeant, 5 combat tours, bronze star with Valor, and numerous other combat decorations. When he returned with chronic severe post traumatic stress syndrome, he did not get the health care he deeply needed, and when…

“The “Tom Brady” of the courtroom. Fair, firm and a proven winner.”

J.E., former client

“Aaron Meyer was my lead trial attorney for over two years during my general court-martial that concluded last year. Aaron’s hard work, strong character, and willingness to go above and beyond resulted in an acquittal of all charges. He stuck by me throughout the entire length of the investigation and…

“I have had the opportunity to work with Aaron firsthand in and out of court. I have also been able to watch him in action in some of the most complex and hotly litigated cases. Aaron is, bar none, the most capable, tenacious and effective criminal defense attorney that I…

John Wescott

“In the 4 years I worked with him (2 in the defense office, 2 as a court reporter) I can say he logged the most late nights, attacked his cases with a vigor rarely seen, and was the first person I would turn to because I know he always puts…

C.M.B 2013, former client

“From the first time Mr. Meyer and I met, he knew it was going to be a long hard case, with so much stacked against me. But at no point did that ever stop him from proving the truth in my case. He was able to bring in number one…

“I’ve worked with the highest levels of leadership in the military, highly qualified litigation experts, and special victims qualified attorneys. I’ve been a prosecutor and a defense attorney, and Aaron is, heads and shoulders above, the best litigator that I’ve ever met. If I were ever in trouble, Aaron Meyer…

Request A Free Consultation

Fields Marked With An “*” Are Required

4100 Newport Place Suite 620 Newport Beach, CA 92660

Call Us Now

© Copyright 2024 Aaron Meyer Law • All rights reserved. Disclaimer | Site Map | Privacy Policy

• More from M-W
• To save this word, you'll need to log in. Log In

Definition of desertion

• abandonment
• dereliction

Examples of desertion in a Sentence

These examples are programmatically compiled from various online sources to illustrate current usage of the word 'desertion.' Any opinions expressed in the examples do not represent those of Merriam-Webster or its editors. Send us feedback about these examples.

Word History

borrowed from Middle French & Latin; Middle French, borrowed from Latin dēsertiōn-, dēsertiō, from dēserere "to part company with, abandon, leave uninhabited, leave in the lurch" + -tiōn-, -tiō, suffix of verbal action — more at desert entry 3

1591, in the meaning defined at sense 1

Dictionary Entries Near desertion

desertification

desert ironwood

Cite this Entry

“Desertion.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary , Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/desertion. Accessed 21 May. 2024.

Legal Definition

Legal definition of desertion.

Note: Desertion is a ground for divorce in many states.

More from Merriam-Webster on desertion

Nglish: Translation of desertion for Spanish Speakers

Britannica English: Translation of desertion for Arabic Speakers

Britannica.com: Encyclopedia article about desertion

Subscribe to America's largest dictionary and get thousands more definitions and advanced search—ad free!

Can you solve 4 words at once?

Word of the day.

See Definitions and Examples »

Get Word of the Day daily email!

Popular in Grammar & Usage

More commonly misspelled words, your vs. you're: how to use them correctly, every letter is silent, sometimes: a-z list of examples, more commonly mispronounced words, how to use em dashes (—), en dashes (–) , and hyphens (-), popular in wordplay, the words of the week - may 17, birds say the darndest things, a great big list of bread words, 10 scrabble words without any vowels, 12 more bird names that sound like insults (and sometimes are), games & quizzes.

• Cambridge Dictionary +Plus

Meaning of desertion in English

Your browser doesn't support HTML5 audio

• backstabber
• break ranks idiom
• faithlessly
• faithlessness
• fifth column
• stab someone in the back idiom
• tergiversation
• throw someone to the lions idiom
• throw someone under the bus idiom
• treasonable
• unfaithfulness

You can also find related words, phrases, and synonyms in the topics:

desertion | American Dictionary

Examples of desertion, translations of desertion.

Get a quick, free translation!

Word of the Day

ride off into the sunset

to begin a new, happy life at the end of a story

Searching out and tracking down: talking about finding or discovering things

Learn more with +Plus

• Recent and Recommended {{#preferredDictionaries}} {{name}} {{/preferredDictionaries}}
• Definitions Clear explanations of natural written and spoken English English Learner’s Dictionary Essential British English Essential American English
• Grammar and thesaurus Usage explanations of natural written and spoken English Grammar Thesaurus
• Pronunciation British and American pronunciations with audio English Pronunciation
• English–Chinese (Simplified) Chinese (Simplified)–English
• English–Chinese (Traditional) Chinese (Traditional)–English
• English–Dutch Dutch–English
• English–French French–English
• English–German German–English
• English–Indonesian Indonesian–English
• English–Italian Italian–English
• English–Japanese Japanese–English
• English–Norwegian Norwegian–English
• English–Polish Polish–English
• English–Portuguese Portuguese–English
• English–Spanish Spanish–English
• English–Swedish Swedish–English
• Dictionary +Plus Word Lists
• English    Noun
• American    Noun
• Translations
• All translations

To add desertion to a word list please sign up or log in.

Add desertion to one of your lists below, or create a new one.

{{message}}

Something went wrong.

There was a problem sending your report.

Encyclopedia Virginia, Virginia Humanities

Desertion (Confederate) during the Civil War

Desertion occurs when soldiers deliberately and permanently leave military service before their term of service has expired. During the American Civil War (1861–1865), both the Union and Confederate armies were plagued by deserters, whose absence depleted the strength of their respective forces. Historians traditionally have distinguished between “stragglers”—those soldiers who leave with the intention of returning—and deserters, who are absent without leave, or AWOL, for thirty days or more. The reasons soldiers left, meanwhile, included poor equipment, food, and leadership. Some acts of desertion have also been described as a form of political protest. Confederate Virginians fled military service at a rate of between 10 and 15 percent, more or less comparable to the desertion rate among Union troops, which stood between 9 and 12 percent. Prior to mid-1862, desertion was lightly punished if at all, but following the Confederate Conscription Act of April 1862, enforcement was often harsh and included execution .

Historians have argued over the proper way to interpret the act of desertion—whether it should be regarded as a protest against the state or a reaction to the specific and immediate problems that soldiers faced (such as inadequate rations, excessively strict officers, etc.). Consensus has been made more difficult by the lack of reliable quantitative evidence demonstrating both the volume and timing of desertion. Patterns in Virginia suggest that Virginia’s Confederate soldiers deserted for a variety of reasons. A careful study of the 44th Virginia Infantry Regiment revealed a shockingly high desertion rate of nearly 30 percent, but it persuasively attributed this to a range of quotidian factors faced by soldiers in the regiment, including faulty equipment, spoiled food, and unresponsive officers. In other words, the complex set of factors that shaped Virginians’ decisions to abandon the army cannot be reduced to a simple expression of discontent over the Confederate war effort. Without a doubt, Confederate soldiers disliked many of their government’s policies, but most pursued other ways of expressing those concerns.

Desertion was common from the beginning of the war, but, until early in 1862, it was not always defined as such. When the war unexpectedly lasted past the first summer and fall, Virginia recruits began taking what many called “French leave” by absenting themselves for a few days or longer in order to visit friends and family (the term comes from an eighteenth-century French custom of leaving a reception without saying a formal good bye to the host or hostess). Officers pursued these men with varying degrees of diligence, but because most returned in time for the spring campaigns, few were formally charged with and punished for desertion.

This changed with the first Conscription Act, passed by the Confederate Congress on April 16, 1862, which required all males between the ages of 18 and 35 to serve in the military. In so doing, the legislation more carefully defined the legal parameters of loyalty and duty while also setting up rigorous enforcement provisions. Desertion, like avoiding the draft, would come to be seen, legally at least, as an act of disloyalty sometimes punishable by death. In addition, the Conscription Act also automatically reenlisted one-year volunteers for three years, causing an uproar of protest among soldiers. The Northern draft, passed in March 1863, caused rioting in New York and yet did not automatically reenlist soldiers who were already serving. Thinking the law unfair, Confederate soldiers deserted at their highest rates during 1862.

During both of Robert E. Lee ‘s invasions of the North—the Maryland Campaign during the fall of 1862 and the Gettysburg Campaign the following summer—the Army of Northern Virginia suffered serious attrition from “straggling” and desertion. Lee himself estimated that a third of his force was absent at the Battle of Antietam on September 17, 1862. Some of these men were too weak to maintain the year’s punishing schedule of marching, especially after the grueling campaigns from the Seven Days through Second Manassas . Men suffered from a critical lack of shoes, clothing, and food, and, following the campaign, Lee quickly moved to fix problems in the Confederate quartermaster department. Other soldiers deserted not for lack of supplies but because they opposed on principle Lee’s decision to take the war north. Still others probably deserted with no intention of returning, even when the army returned to Virginia.

Soldiers and civilians alike soon became fed up with the lack of discipline in the army, leading the Confederate military to undertake harsher methods of enforcement. Lee believed that military executions were sometimes necessary, particularly in the cases of habitual deserters. Just prior to the Second Battle of Manassas, Confederate general Thomas J. “Stonewall” Jackson ordered three such men publicly executed. On August 19, 1862, they were marched in front of open graves and shot in the presence of thousands of witnesses, provoking a variety of responses. While some soldiers expressed anger and revulsion at the incident, others respected the level of discipline it represented. In general, soldiers believed that executions were sometimes necessary, but felt that in this case the sudden decision to enforce the letter of the law was unfair.

The government and military also used methods other than execution to battle desertion. Detachments of troops scoured the countryside in an effort to find stragglers and deserters and return them to the ranks. In the mountains of southwestern Virginia, bands of deserters resisted capture by the government, and by late in 1864 they posed a serious enough threat that the Confederate government sent regular soldiers to Floyd County to restore order. In that region, at least, desertion did in fact represent a rejection of the Confederacy.

As in the early days of the war, few of the thousands who “fell away” during marches were charged with desertion. In fact, as the Army of Northern Virginia returned to Virginia after its northern campaigns, many of those who had fallen out of the ranks due to fatigue and injury returned. In August 1863, following defeat at Gettysburg, Confederate president Jefferson Davis offered a full amnesty for deserters in order to replenish the army’s depleted ranks. French leaves, meanwhile, were authorized on the company level in order to help ward off longer-term desertions.

Desertions escalated substantially in the final months of the war, as Union general-in-chief Ulysses S. Grant finally broke through Lee’s defense of Richmond and Petersburg , on April 2, 1865, and sent the Confederate army west in retreat. As many as several hundred men per night fled the army even before Richmond fell. On the march toward Appomattox , thousands more also deserted—mostly Virginians and North Carolinians, whose homes were already temptingly close.

• Civil War, American (1861–1865)
• Bohannon, Keith S. “Dirty, Ragged, and Ill-Provided For: Confederate Logistical Problems in the 1862 Maryland Campaign and Their Solutions,” in The Antietam Campaign , edited by Gary W. Gallagher. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1999.
• Carmichael, Peter S. “So Far From God and So Close to Stonewall Jackson: The Executions of Three Shenandoah Valley Soldiers.” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 111 (Winter 2003): 33–66.
• Cashin, Joan E. “Deserters, Civilians, and Draft Resistance in the North,” in The War Was You and Me: Civilians in the American Civil War , edited by Joan E. Cashin. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2002.
• Dotson, Rand. “‘The Grave and Scandalous Evil Infected to Your People’: The Erosion of Confederate Loyalty in Floyd County, Virginia.” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 108 (Fall 2000): 393–434.
• Lonn, Ella. Desertion During the Civil War . Gloucester, Massachusetts: American Historical Association, 1928; Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1998.
• Ruffner, Kevin C. “Civil War Desertion from a Black Belt Regiment: An Examination of the 44th Virginia Infantry,” in The Edge of the South: Life in Nineteenth-Century Virginia , edited by Edward L. Ayers and John C. Willis. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 1991.
• Sheehan-Dean, Aaron. Why Confederates Fought: Family and Nation in Civil War Virginia. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2007.
• Weitz, Mark. More Damning Than Slaughter: Desertion in the Confederate Army . Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2008.
• Name First Last
• Phone This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Never Miss an Update

Partners & affiliates.

Encyclopedia Virginia 946 Grady Ave. Ste. 100 Charlottesville, VA 22903 (434) 924-3296

Indigenous Acknowledgment

Virginia Humanities acknowledges the Monacan Nation , the original people of the land and waters of our home in Charlottesville, Virginia.

We invite you to learn more about Indians in Virginia in our Encyclopedia Virginia .

The Law Dictionary

Your Free Online Legal Dictionary • Featuring Black’s Law Dictionary, 2nd Ed.

DESERTION Definition & Legal Meaning

Definition & citations:.

The act by which a person abandons and forsakes, without justification ,or unauthorized, a station or condition of public or social life, renouncing its responsibilities and evading its duties.In matrimonial and divorce law. An actual abandonment or breaking off of matrimonial cohabitation, by either of the parties, and a renouncing or refusal of the duties and obligations of the relation, with an intent to abandon or forsake entirely and not to return to or resume marital relations, occurring without legal justification either In the consent or the wrongful conduct of the other party. State v. Baker, 112 La. SOI, 3GSouth. 703; Bailey v. Bailey, 21 Grat. (Va.) 47; Ingersoll v. Ingersoll, 49 Pa. 250, 88Am. Dec. 500; Droege v. Droege, 55 Mo. App. 482; Bar- nett v. Barnett, 27 Ind. App.400, 01 N. E. 737; Williams v. Williams, 130 N. Y. 193, 29 N. E. 98, 14 L. R. A. 220, 27Am. St Rep. 517; Magrath v. Magrath, 103 Mass. 579. 4 Am. Rep. 579; Cass v. Cass, 31N. J. Eq. 020; Ogilvie v. Ogilvie, 37 Or. 171, 01 Pac. 027 ; Tirrell v. Tirrell. 72 Conn.507, 45 Atl. 153, 47 L. R. A. 750; State v. Weber, 48 Mo. App. 504. In military law . An offense which consists in the abandonment of his post and duties by a person commissioned or enlisted in the army or navy, without leave and with the intention not to return. Hollingsworth v. Shaw, 19 Ohio St. 432, 2 Am. Rep.411;In re Sutherland (D. C.) 53 Fed. 551. There is a difference between desertion and simple “absence without leave;” in order to constitute the former, there must be an intention not to return to the service. Hanson v. South Seituate, 115 Mass. 330. In maritime law . The act by which a seaman deserts and abandons a ship or vessel, in which he had engaged to perform a voyage, before the expiration of his time, and without leave. By desertion, in the maritime law , is meant, not a mere unauthorized absence from the ship without leave, but an unauthorized absence from the ship, with an intention not to return to her service, or, as it is often expressed, animo nonrevertendi; that is, with an intention to desert. Coffin v. Jenkins, 3 Story, 108, Fed. Cas.No. 2,948; The Union (D. C.) 20 Fed. 539; The Mary C. Conner.v (D. C.) 9 Fed. 223; The George, 10 Fed. Cas. 204.

This article contains general legal information but does not constitute professional legal advice for your particular situation. The Law Dictionary is not a law firm, and this page does not create an attorney-client or legal adviser relationship. If you have specific questions, please consult a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.

Browse Legal Articles

Business Formation

Business Law

Child Custody & Support

Criminal Law

Employment & Labor Law

Estate Planning

Immigration

Intellectual Property

Landlord-Tenant

Motor Vehicle Accidents

Personal Injury

Real Estate & Property Law

Traffic Violations

Browse by Area of Law

Powered by Black’s Law Dictionary, Free 2nd ed., and The Law Dictionary .

About The Law Dictionary

Terms and Conditions

Privacy Policy

Understanding Desertion from the Military: Causes, Impacts, and Prevention

by Adam | UCMJ | 1 comment

Desertion from the military is a topic shrouded in complexity and emotion. It’s a decision that carries heavy consequences, not just for the individual involved but also for their unit, their family, and their country. You might think it’s a rare occurrence, reserved for history books or dramatic movies, but the truth is, it happens more often than you’d expect.

Understanding why soldiers desert, the legal ramifications, and the impact on military operations requires a deep dive into the heart of loyalty, duty, and personal sacrifice. Whether driven by fear, disillusionment, or personal crises, each case of desertion tells a unique story. As we explore this sensitive topic, you’ll gain insight into the challenges faced by those who serve and the fine line between duty and personal conviction.

Understanding Desertion From the Military

Desertion from the military is a serious offense, one that presents a myriad of legal, social, and emotional challenges for the deserter, their comrades, and the larger military community. At its core, desertion occurs when a service member intentionally abandons their post or fails to report for duty without authorization or valid reason. The complexity of this issue emerges from the various factors that drive an individual to make such a decision.

Legal Ramifications

Desertion carries significant legal consequences. Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), service members found guilty of desertion face a range of penalties, from dishonorable discharge to imprisonment. Severity depends on circumstances like wartime conditions, with penalties escalating substantially during such periods.

• Dishonorable Discharge: The loss of military and veteran benefits, tarnishing one’s record.
• Imprisonment: Sentences can vary, often determined by the context of the desertion.
• Fines and Forfeitures: Deserters may also face financial penalties.

Psychological Impact

The decision to desert is rarely taken lightly and is often preceded by intense personal turmoil. Service members may grapple with:

• Mental Health Issues: Stress, anxiety, and depression are common precursors.
• Moral Injury: The inner conflict arising from actions that violate personal ethical codes.
• Fear of Combat: Particularly in wartime, the fear of death or injury can overwhelm.

Impact on Military Cohesion

Desertion affects more than just the individual; it disrupts unit cohesion and morale. Soldiers depend on each other for emotional and physical support, especially during deployments. The abrupt absence of a team member can lead to:

• Increased Workload: Remaining members must compensate, often under stressful conditions.
• Lowered Morale: Trust within the unit can erode, leading to decreased effectiveness.
• Resentment: Feelings of betrayal may surface among comrades left to carry the burden.

As you navigate the complexities surrounding desertion from the military, it’s crucial to recognize the multi-faceted nature of this act. Behind every case of desertion, there are underlying issues that challenge the binary notions of loyalty and duty. Understanding these layers is essential for addressing the root causes and mitigating the consequences associated with desertion.

Historical Context and Notable Cases

Desertion from the military isn’t a new phenomenon, tracing back to ancient times when soldiers would abandon their posts for various reasons. History is rich with instances that shed light on the evolving nature of military desertion and its impact on armies and society.

During the American Civil War (1861-1865), an estimated 288,000 Union soldiers deserted. Similarly, the Confederate forces saw about 103,400 desertions. These high numbers underscore the challenges of morale and commitment in prolonged conflicts. Economic hardship, the horrors of warfare, and family concerns were common reasons soldiers left their ranks.

World War I and World War II further illustrated the complexities of desertion. In World War I, over 300,000 French soldiers deserted. During World War II, the US military recorded approximately 21,049 soldiers convicted of desertion, with 49 facing the death penalty, although only one, Private Eddie Slovik, was executed in 1945. Slovik’s case is particularly notable for highlighting the severe consequences of desertion during times of war and the moral dilemmas faced by military courts.

The Vietnam War saw a significant uptick in desertions, with estimates suggesting that up to 50,000 American servicemen deserted, many fleeing to Canada to avoid the draft and combat. This period marked a shift in public perception, as societal attitudes towards the war and the draft played a crucial role in shaping views on desertion.

In more recent history, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have witnessed cases of desertion, though numbers are significantly lower compared to previous conflicts. Notable cases, such as that of Bowe Bergdahl who deserted his post in Afghanistan in 2009 and was captured by the Taliban, have sparked debates on the complexities of duty, mental health, and the harsh realities of modern warfare.

These instances highlight the enduring and complicated nature of desertion, influenced by personal, societal, and situational factors. Understanding these historical contexts and notable cases helps unravel the multifaceted challenges that lead to such actions, emphasizing the need for empathy and comprehensive support systems for those serving in the military.

Legal Consequences of Desertion

Transitioning from the historical context and societal attitudes toward military desertion, it’s essential to understand the legal implications that follow such actions. Desertion, defined as leaving one’s post or failing to report for duty with the intention of not returning, carries severe legal penalties under military law.

Arrest and Courts-Martial

Upon identification as a deserter, the military actively seeks the individual’s return to face charges. Arrests can be executed by military police or through federal agencies, depending on the circumstances. Courts-martial proceedings then assess the case, considering factors like intent, duration of absence, and circumstances leading to the desertion.

Penalties for desertion vary, but they can be harsh, aiming to deter such acts. During times of war, the maximum penalty can include death, though this is rarely executed. More commonly, deserters face long prison terms, dishonorable discharges, forfeiture of pay, and loss of veterans’ benefits. The severity of the punishment often depends on the deserter’s actions during their absence, any attempts to return voluntarily, and the impact of their desertion on their unit’s operations.

Absence Without Leave (AWOL) vs Desertion

It’s vital to distinguish between AWOL and desertion. AWOL refers to a temporary absence without official leave but without the intention to permanently abandon one’s duty. While also subject to legal action, the consequences for AWOL are typically less severe than those for desertion, given the absence’s temporary nature and the lack of intent to permanently leave.

Legal Defense and Clemency Opportunities

Legal defenses exist for those accused of desertion, including duress, lack of intent, and impossibility of return. Moreover, military authorities may grant clemency or reduce penalties based on individual circumstances, such as mental health issues or family crises. Initiatives to address mental health and provide support systems aim to reduce instances of desertion by addressing underlying issues.

Understanding the legal consequences of desertion highlights the gravity of such a decision. It underscores the military’s emphasis on duty, loyalty, and the severe ramifications for abandoning one’s post, placing a spotlight on the need for robust support structures for personnel navigating challenges.

Psychological Impact on Deserters and Their Families

Following the exploration of military desertion’s historical context and legal consequences, the psychological impact on deserters and their families emerges as a compelling consideration. Deserters often experience a range of emotional and psychological issues that stem from their decision to leave the military without authorization.

For Deserters:

• Guilt and Shame: Many deserters grapple with intense feelings of guilt for abandoning their duty and comrades. The shame associated with the label of being a deserter can lead to profound self-esteem issues.
• Anxiety and Fear: The constant fear of arrest and prosecution can cause chronic anxiety. Deserters might also fear the judgment of their community, adding to their stress.
• Depression: The isolation from their military community and uncertainty about their future can trigger depression. This is exacerbated by a lack of mental health support for individuals in hiding or those estranged from their families.
• Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD): Some deserters leave due to traumatic experiences in service. Without proper care, these traumas can lead to PTSD, a condition that affects their ability to function in daily life.
• Stress and Anxiety: Families of deserters often deal with constant anxiety over the possibility of their loved one’s arrest. The social stigma attached to desertion can strain family relationships and lead to isolation from their communities.
• Financial Hardship: The loss of the deserter’s military income and benefits can plunge families into financial difficulties, impacting their quality of life.
• Emotional Strain: The emotional toll of having a family member desert, coupled with the uncertainty of their situation, can lead to feelings of helplessness and depression among family members.

Understanding these psychological impacts is crucial. It not only highlights the need for preventative measures within the military to address the root causes leading to desertion but also underscores the importance of support systems for deserters and their families facing these challenges. Providing mental health resources and community support can play a significant role in mitigating the negative consequences associated with military desertion.

Methods to Prevent Desertion

Addressing the issue of desertion within the military involves implementing strategic measures that not only prevent the act but also support service members in various aspects of their lives. Following the outline of the psychological and legal ramifications of desertion, it’s clear that preemptive actions are both necessary and beneficial. Here, explore key methods aimed at minimizing instances of desertion.

Enhancing Mental Health Support

Mental health plays a critical role in most cases of desertion. Offering comprehensive mental health services, including counseling, therapy sessions, and stress management programs, can significantly reduce the risk. Creating an environment where service members feel comfortable seeking help for mental health issues is essential.

Improving Communication Channels

Open and effective communication between command and servicemen and women ensures issues can be addressed before they escalate. Developing trust and understanding within units encourages service members to discuss their concerns and seek advice without fear of stigma or retribution.

Providing Family Support Services

Acknowledging the strain on families, military organizations can implement programs to assist with childcare, financial planning, and emotional support for the families of those deployed. By alleviating some of the external pressures, service members can focus more on their duties and less on issues at home.

Offering Flexible Leave Policies

Rigid leave policies can contribute to feelings of entrapment and desperation. Introducing more flexible leave options allows service members to tend to personal matters, reducing the likelihood of AWOL incidents or desertion.

Conducting Pre-Enlistment Screenings

Careful screening of potential enlistees can identify individuals who may not be suited to the military lifestyle or who could be at higher risk for desertion. Psychological evaluations and background checks help in making informed decisions about enlistment eligibility.

Implementing these methods requires commitment from all levels of military leadership but, if done effectively, can lead to a decrease in desertion cases. By focusing on the well-being of service members and offering support and flexibility, the military can create a more stable and committed force.

Understanding military desertion requires a deep dive into its complex layers, from the historical and legal frameworks to the psychological toll it takes on individuals and their families. It’s clear that while the consequences are severe, the root causes often stem from issues that can be addressed proactively. By implementing comprehensive support systems, enhancing communication, and ensuring a thorough vetting process, the military can significantly reduce instances of desertion. These measures not only help in retaining a committed force but also in safeguarding the mental well-being of our service members and their loved ones. Embracing these strategies marks a step toward a more resilient and supportive military environment where desertion becomes a rarity rather than a recurring challenge.

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Post page form., next steps: sync an email add-on, ucmj categories.

• 01-General Provisions
• 02. Apprehension and Restraint
• 03 Non-Judicial Punishment
• 04. Court-Martial Jurisdiction
• 05. Composition of Courts-Martial
• 06. Pre-Trial Procedure
• 07. Trial Procedure
• 08. Sentences
• 09. Post-Trial Procedure and Review of Courts Martial
• 10. Punitive Articles
• 11. Miscellaneous Provisions
• 12. Court of Military Appeals

• Dictionaries home
• American English
• Collocations
• German-English
• Grammar home
• Practical English Usage
• Learn & Practise Grammar (Beta)
• Word Lists home
• My Word Lists
• Recent additions
• Resources home
• Text Checker

Definition of desertion noun from the Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary

• The army was badly affected by desertions.

Join our community to access the latest language learning and assessment tips from Oxford University Press!

• She felt betrayed by her husband's desertion.
• Industrialization led to the growth of cities and the desertion of villages.
• the of the party by former supporters

Nearby words

• Desert Island Discs

Definition of 'desertion'

Desertion in british english.

desertion in American English

Examples of 'desertion' in a sentence desertion, synonyms of 'desertion', cobuild collocations desertion, trends of desertion.

View usage for: All Years Last 10 years Last 50 years Last 100 years Last 300 years

Browse alphabetically desertion

• deserticolous
• desertification
• desertion rate
• desertisation
• desertization
• All ENGLISH words that begin with 'D'

Related terms of desertion

Quick word challenge

Quiz Review

Score: 0 / 5

Wordle Helper

Scrabble Tools

Dictionary definition of desertion

The act of willfully and permanently abandoning one's post, duty, or allegiance without permission or lawful justification. "The soldier's comrades felt a sense of betrayal after his desertion."

Detailed meaning of desertion

It denotes the intentional act of leaving behind a position, organization, or group to which one had a commitment or obligation. Desertion often occurs in the context of military service, where it involves the unauthorized departure of a soldier from their assigned unit or from the military altogether. However, desertion can also pertain to other contexts, such as civil or political organizations, where an individual abandons their role or responsibilities without proper consent or justification. Desertion is typically seen as a breach of loyalty, trust, or duty, often carrying legal consequences and disciplinary actions. It is viewed as a serious offense that undermines the integrity, cohesion, and effectiveness of the entity from which one deserts.

Example sentences containing desertion

1. The soldier's desertion from the army resulted in a warrant for his arrest. 2. The act of desertion is considered a serious offense in the military. 3. The captain was shocked by the sudden desertion of several members of his crew. 4. The organization faced challenges due to the desertion of key members. 5. Desertion during wartime is often met with severe consequences. 6. The soldier was court-martialed for his desertion and stripped of his rank.

History and etymology of desertion

The noun 'desertion' finds its etymological roots in the Latin word 'desertio,' which is derived from the verb 'deserere.' This Latin term, 'deserere,' encompasses the notion of abandonment or forsaking. As societies and militaries organized, the concept of individuals willfully and permanently abandoning their duties, posts, or allegiances became increasingly significant. This led to the emergence of the Old French term 'desercion' and, subsequently, Middle English 'desercioun,' both of which retained the core sense of willful abandonment. Over time, 'desertion' became firmly established in the English language, referring to the act of willfully and permanently abandoning one's post, duty, or allegiance without permission or lawful justification, particularly in the context of military or organizational commitments.

Quiz: Find the meaning of desertion

Continue Quiz

Further usage examples of desertion

1. The family struggled to cope with the emotional aftermath of their son's desertion. 2. The general implemented stricter measures to prevent instances of desertion in the ranks. 3. The deserter's actions cast a shadow over the unit's morale and trust. 4. The army implemented a program to support veterans who experienced post-war desertion. 5. The organization worked to address the underlying issues that led to employee desertion. 6. The sudden desertion of troops weakened our defenses. 7. Desertion from the army was punishable by severe penalties. 8. His desertion left a void in our team's leadership. 9. Desertion during wartime was seen as an act of betrayal. 10. The general lamented the increasing rate of desertion. 11. Desertion often stemmed from the horrors of war. 12. She couldn't bear the guilt that came with desertion. 13. Desertion from the mission jeopardized the operation. 14. Desertion was a stain on his otherwise honorable record. 15. The soldiers faced court-martial for their desertion. 16. Desertion was the only way to escape the oppressive regime. 17. The consequences of desertion were widely known. 18. Desertion shattered the unity of their once loyal group. 19. Desertion was a last resort for the disillusioned. 20. His desertion haunted him long after the war ended. 21. The commander grappled with the problem of desertion. 22. Desertion was a desperate act born out of despair. 23. Desertion was the ultimate act of defiance against tyranny. 24. The policy aimed to reduce desertion rates in the army. 25. Desertion eroded the trust among the ranks.

Quiz categories containing desertion

Multiple-Choice

Opposite Words

Same/Different

Spelling Bee

abandonment,absconding,betrayal,forsaking,relinquishment,reneging,renunciation,withdrawal

eb68db_f89bdb52d3804e09bc70dd471d930fd1.mp3

abandonment, return, loyalty, commitment

https://static.wixstatic.com/media/eb68db_0520060abe204245a48186cfb9ae13ad~mv2.jpg, https://static.wixstatic.com/media/eb68db_dcaa522749d44677bb92a214c211baf8~mv2.jpg, https://static.wixstatic.com/media/eb68db_58a1eac1ced24fda84b20eda1c9bd668~mv2.jpg, https://static.wixstatic.com/media/eb68db_a3dcfb510cdd42b7a277c8c6a59b2a68~mv2.jpg

apostasy,defection,disloyalty,treachery

Departure and Leaving, Division and Separation, Ending and Conclusion, Renunciation and Suspension

• 1.1 Etymology
• 1.2 Pronunciation
• 1.3.1 Derived terms
• 1.3.2 Related terms
• 1.3.3 Translations
• 1.4 Anagrams
• 2.1.1 Declension
• 2.2 Further reading

English [ edit ]

Etymology [ edit ].

Borrowed from Middle French désertion .

Pronunciation [ edit ]

• ( Received Pronunciation ) IPA ( key ) : /dɪˈzɜːʃən/
• ( General American ) IPA ( key ) : /dɪˈzɝʃən/
• Rhymes: -ɜː(ɹ)ʃən

Noun [ edit ]

desertion ( countable and uncountable , plural desertions )

• The act of deserting .

Derived terms [ edit ]

• spiritual desertion

Related terms [ edit ]

Translations [ edit ], anagrams [ edit ].

• detersion , enteroids , interdose

Danish [ edit ]

desertion   c ( singular definite desertionen , plural indefinite desertioner )

Declension [ edit ]

Further reading [ edit ].

• “ desertion ” in Den Danske Ordbog

• English terms derived from Proto-Indo-European
• English terms derived from the Proto-Indo-European root *ser- (bind)
• English terms borrowed from Middle French
• English terms derived from Middle French
• English 3-syllable words
• English terms with IPA pronunciation
• English terms with audio links
• Rhymes:English/ɜː(ɹ)ʃən
• Rhymes:English/ɜː(ɹ)ʃən/3 syllables
• English lemmas
• English nouns
• English uncountable nouns
• English countable nouns
• Danish lemmas
• Danish nouns
• Danish common-gender nouns
• Mandarin terms with redundant transliterations
• Danish nouns with red links in their headword lines

Navigation menu

• Statement from Ambassador Katherine Tai Commemorating World Trade Week
• United States and Kenya Joint Statement after the Fifth Round of U.S.-Kenya Strategic Trade and Investment Partnership Negotiations
• Readout of Ambassador Katherine Tai’s Meeting With Peru’s Minister of Foreign Trade and Tourism Elizabeth Galdo Marín
• Ambassador Tai to Travel to Phoenix, Arizona
• The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, Small Business Administration, and Department of Commerce Convene the Third USMCA Small and Medium-Sized Enterprise Dialogue
• ICYMI: U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai Delivers Remarks on Her Actions to Increase China Tariffs

U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai to Take Further Action on China Tariffs After Releasing Statutory Four-Year Review

• USTR Invites Public Participation in Stakeholder Listening Session During Fifth United States-Kenya Strategic Trade and Investment Partnership Negotiating Round
• USMCA Rapid Response Labor Mechanism Panel Releases Determination Regarding Grupo México Mine; Biden-Harris Administration Will Continue Seeking to Enforce USMCA Labor Obligations and Advance Workers’ Rights
• Ambassador Tai to Travel to Arequipa, Peru
• Week Ahead Guidance for the Week of May 13 to May 17, 2024
• United States and Kenya to Hold Fifth Negotiating Round Under their Strategic Trade and Investment Partnership
• Ambassador Tai to Travel to Los Angeles, California
• United States and the Philippines Hold Agriculture and Labor Working Group Meetings Under the Trade and Investment Framework Agreement
• Readout of the U.S.-Iraq Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) Council Meeting
• USTR Announces Neil Beck as Acting Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for WTO and Multilateral Affairs
• Week Ahead Guidance for the Week of May 6 to May 10, 2024
• Statement from Ambassador Katherine Tai in Recognition of International Workers’ Day
• Readout of Negotiating Round Under the U.S.-Taiwan Initiative on 21st-Century Trade
• Statement from Ambassador Katherine Tai Celebrating Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Heritage Month
• Policy Offices
• Press Office
• Press Releases

May 14, 2024

WASHINGTON – U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai today released the following statement concerning the statutory review of the tariff actions in the Section 301 investigation of China’s Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to Technology Transfer, Intellectual Property, and Innovation: “After thorough review of the statutory report on Section 301 tariffs, and having considered my advice, President Biden is directing me to take further action to encourage the elimination of the People’s Republic of China’s unfair technology transfer-related policies and practices that continue to burden U.S. commerce and harm American workers and businesses,” said Ambassador Katherine Tai.    “As the President recognizes in his memorandum, while the tariffs have been effective in encouraging the PRC to take some steps to address the issues identified in the Section 301 investigation, further action is required.   “In light of President Biden’s direction, I will be proposing modifications to the China tariffs under Section 301 to confront the PRC’s unfair policies and practices. From the beginning of the Biden-Harris Administration, I have been committed to using every lever of my office to promote American jobs and investments, and these recommendations are no different. Today, we serve our statutory goal to stop the PRC’s harmful technology transfer-related acts, policies, and practices, including its cyber intrusions and cyber theft. I take this charge seriously, and I will continue to work with my partners across sectors to ensure any action complements the Biden-Harris Administration’s efforts to expand opportunities for American workers and manufacturers.”   The Section 301 statute directs that the four-year review includes a consideration of: the effectiveness of the tariff actions in achieving the objective of the investigation; other actions that could be taken; and the overall effects of the tariff actions on the U.S. economy. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative’s (USTR) Report  addresses the statutory elements of the review, suggests modifications to strengthen the actions, and makes certain recommendations.   To encourage further elimination of the PRC’s technology transfer-related acts, policies, and practices, Ambassador Tai has recommended that products from the PRC currently subject to Section 301 tariffs should remain. Additionally, in light of the increased burden on U.S. commerce, President Biden is directing Ambassador Tai to take action to add or increase tariffs for certain products. As the Report details, Ambassador Tai will propose the following modifications in strategic sectors:

The Report also makes recommendations for: (1) establishing an exclusion process targeting machinery used in domestic manufacturing, including proposals for 19 exclusions for certain solar manufacturing equipment; (2) allocating additional funds to United States Customs and Border Protection for greater enforcement of Section 301 actions; (3) greater collaboration and cooperation between private companies and government authorities to combat state-sponsored technology theft; and (4) continuing to assess approaches to support diversification of supply chains to enhance our own supply chain resilience.   President Biden is also directing Ambassador Tai to establish an exclusion process for machinery used in domestic manufacturing and to prioritize, in particular, exclusions for certain solar manufacturing equipment.   Next week, USTR will issue a Federal Register notice announcing procedures for interested persons to comment on the proposed modifications and information concerning an exclusion process for machinery used in domestic manufacturing.    Background     In May 2022, USTR commenced the statutory four-year review process by notifying representatives of domestic industries that benefit from the tariff actions of the possible termination of those actions and of the opportunity for the representatives to request continuation.  In September 2022, USTR announced that because requests for continuation were received, the tariff actions had not terminated and USTR would conduct a review of the tariff actions.  USTR opened a docket on November 15, 2022, for interested persons to submit comments with respect to a number of considerations concerning the review.  USTR received nearly 1,500 comments.   As part of the statutory review process, throughout 2023 and early 2024, USTR and the Section 301 Committee (a staff-level body of the USTR-led, interagency Trade Policy Staff Committee) held numerous meetings with agency experts concerning the review and the comments received.    Specifically, the Report concludes: 

• The Section 301 actions have been effective in encouraging the PRC to take steps toward eliminating some of its technology transfer-related acts, policies, and practices and have reduced some of the exposure of U.S. persons and businesses to these technology transfer-related acts, policies, and practices.  
• The PRC has not eliminated many of its technology transfer-related acts, policies, and practices, which continue to impose a burden or restriction on U.S. commerce. Instead of pursuing fundamental reform, the PRC has persisted, and in some cases become aggressive, including through cyber intrusions and cybertheft, in its attempts to acquire and absorb foreign technology, which further burden or restrict U.S. commerce.  
• Economic analyses generally find that tariffs (particularly PRC retaliation) have had small negative effects on U.S. aggregate economic welfare, positive impacts on U.S. production in the 10 sectors most directly affected by the tariffs, and minimal impacts on economy-wide prices and employment.  
• Negative effects on the United States are particularly associated with retaliatory tariffs that the PRC has applied to U.S. exports.  
• Critically, these analyses examine the tariff actions as isolated policy measures without reference to the policy landscape that may be reinforcing or undermining the effects of the tariffs.  
• Economic analyses, including the principal U.S. Government analysis published by the U.S. International Trade Commission, generally find that the Section 301 tariffs have contributed to reducing U.S. imports of goods from the PRC and increasing imports from alternate sources, including U.S. allies and partners, thereby potentially supporting U.S. supply chain diversification and resilience. 

• 600 17th Street NW
• Washington, DC 20508

• Reports and Publications
• Fact Sheets
• Speeches and Remarks
• Blog and Op-Eds
• The White House Plan to Beat COVID-19
• Free Trade Agreements
• Organization
• Advisory Committees
• USTR.gov/open
• Privacy & Legal
• FOIA & Privacy Act
• Attorney Jobs

A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

• Preventing Chronic Diseases: What You Can Do Now
• Living with a Chronic Condition
• Chronic Disease Data
• Community Health Workers
• Workgroup on Translation Tools
• National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (NCCDPHP)

About Chronic Diseases

• Chronic diseases are the leading cause of illness, disability, and death in America.
• Most chronic diseases are caused by a short list of risk factors: smoking, poor nutrition, physical inactivity, and excessive alcohol use.
• Some groups are more affected than others because of factors that limit their ability to make healthy choices.

Chronic diseases in America

Definition‎.

Chronic diseases such as  heart disease ,  cancer , and  diabetes  are the leading causes of death and disability in the United States. They are also leading drivers of the nation's $4.5 trillion in annual health care costs . 1 2 3

Many preventable chronic diseases are caused by a short list of risk behaviors: smoking, poor nutrition, physical inactivity, and excessive alcohol use.

Risk factors

Cigarette smoking  causes more than 480,000 deaths each year in the United States, and over 16 million Americans are living with a disease caused by smoking. Smoking causes cancer, heart disease, stroke, lung diseases, diabetes, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), which includes emphysema and chronic bronchitis.

Poor nutrition and physical inactivity

Poor nutrition  and  physical inactivity  are significant risk factors for obesity and other chronic diseases, such as type 2 diabetes, heart disease, stroke, certain cancers, and depression.

Excessive alcohol use

Over time,  excessive alcohol use  can lead to serious problems, including alcohol use disorder and problems with learning, memory, and mental health. Chronic health conditions linked to excessive alcohol use include high blood pressure, heart disease, stroke, liver disease, and some kinds of cancer.

Who is at risk

Some groups are at higher risk of chronic diseases because of conditions where they are born, live, work, and age. These nonmedical factors, called social determinants of health, can be positive or negative. When they are negative, they limit the opportunities to make healthy choices and get good medical care.

For example, some communities lack safe spaces like parks for people to be active, or grocery stores that sell fresh fruits and vegetables. In some rural areas, it's hard to get medical care because of doctor shortages, hospital closures, or long distances to care. This makes it challenging to get preventive screenings or specialist follow-up care.

What CDC is doing

CDC's National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion supports state, local, tribal, and territorial public health organizations to reduce chronic disease risk factors. Funded programs like REACH and Getting Further Faster focus on addressing the social determinants of health, so that everyone can have the same opportunity to live their healthiest life.

• National health expenditure data: historical. Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Updated December 13, 2023. Accessed February 6, 2024.  https://www.cms.gov/data-research/statistics-trends-and-reports/national-health-expenditure-data/historical
• Buttorff C, Ruder T, Bauman M. Multiple Chronic Conditions in the United States . Rand Corp.; 2017.
• Leading causes of death. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Updated January 23, 2023. Accessed November 7, 2023. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/leading-causes-of-death.htm
• Chronic disease definition: US Department of Health and Human Services. Multiple Chronic Conditions: A Strategic Framework; 2010.

Chronic Disease

Prevalence, costs, risks, prevention, and management of chronic diseases in the United States

For Everyone

Public health.

Abbott, UT System, UH system sued over executive order to combat antisemitism at colleges

Students for Justice in Palestine chapters at the University of Houston and the University of Texas at Dallas as well as the Democratic Socialists of America, which runs youth chapters at several Texas universities, are suing Gov. Greg Abbott over his executive order calling for universities to change free speech policies to better prevent antisemitism on college campuses, including by enforcing the policies against Students for Justice in Palestine and the Palestine Solidarity Committee, its chapter at UT-Austin.

The plaintiffs, represented by Council on Islamic Relations, filed a suit Thursday asking a U.S. District Court to issue an injunction barring the executive order, saying it targets and chills speech against Israel by specifically naming Students for Justice in Palestine and the Palestine Solidarity Committee and by calling for colleges to recognize a broad definition of antisemitism. CAIR alleges that the order's implementation in some cases has censored students' speech in violation of the First Amendment.

Who else is named in the lawsuit and why?

In addition to Abbott, the University of Texas System Board of Regents, University of Houston and the UH System Board of Regents are also named as defendants, as well as Rene Khator, who serves as chancellor of the UH System and president of its flagship school.

University systems and institutions are responsible for carrying out the executive order at their respective institutions, and they are responsible for the legality of their policies.

The president of UT-San Antonio, Taylor Eighmy, is named as a defendant for the second count in the lawsuit, which alleges that UT-San Antonio adopted a "phrase-specific" rule barring Young Democratic Socialists of America members from saying "From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free."

Abbott's executive order specifically lists this an example of "antisemitic phrases." But the lawsuit says the rule is an illegal content-based free speech limitation, and the suit says "its literal and figurative meaning reflect an aspiration for peace and dignity for all people—Palestinians, Israelis, Arabs, Muslims, Jews, Christians, and everyone else."

A UT-San Antonio spokesperson said the university does not comment on pending litigation and did not answer a question asking if the rule was in place as stated in the lawsuit.

The UH System Board of Regents on Wednesday added the state's definition of antisemitism to its policies, the flagship university confirmed in a statement, saying the university has met with Students for Justice in Palestine and "reiterated our commitment to freedom of expression." The University of Houston also asserted that the freedom of expression policy is equally applied without regard to viewpoint and that the system enforces both its freedom of expression policy and anti-discrimination policy.

"The University recognizes and supports the constitutional rights of free speech and peaceful assembly," the statement said. "We encourage all who engage in expressive activity to do so safely and in a manner that respects the rights of others with differing opinions."

The definition of antisemitism that Abbott ordered universities to adopt is "a certain perception of Jews that may be expressed as hatred toward Jews," including "rhetorical and physical acts of antisemitism directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals or their property or toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities."

CAIR's complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asks for relief under the First and 14th amendments, and calls for Abbott's executive order and the UT-San Antonio rule about the slogan to be withdrawn. The suit also requests for the UT and UH systems to not include the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition of antisemitism as specified in Abbott's order "or otherwise target individuals because of their political speech about Israel."

"We are hopeful that a court will see this for what it is, a clear as day abandonment of the First amendment," Gadeir Abbas, an attorney for the plaintiff with CAIR, told the American-Statesman on Thursday.

In a statement Thursday, Andrew Mahaleris, Abbott's press secretary, said antisemitism has been rising, and that the governor "condemns heinous acts of violence and inhumanity against Israel and its people by ruthless terrorists."

"Antisemitism is never acceptable in Texas, and we will do everything we can to fight it," Mahaleris said. "Texas will always stand with Israel and our Jewish neighbors here at home and across the world.”

What was the governor's executive order?

Abbott issued his executive order March 27 to address antisemitism at Texas universities. The Anti-Defamation League reports that acts of antisemitic have risen dramatically since Oct. 7, when Hamas, the militant Palestinian group that controlled the Gaza strip, launched a surprise attack on Israel that killed 1,200 people.

In response, Israel began bombarding Gaza, reportedly killing more than 34,000 people since the war's start. Islamophobic incidents have also risen dramatically since Oct. 7, according to CAIR.

Abbott's executive order did not mention rising incidents of Islamophobia but did mention the state's continued support for Israel and Jewish Texans.

"While many Texas universities have acted quickly to condemn antisemitism and foster appropriate discourse on the terrorist attacks against Israel and the ensuing Israel-Hamas war, some radical organizations have engaged in unacceptable actions on university campuses," the order said.

The order charges all public institutions of higher education in Texas to revise their free speech policies to address antisemitism, instating punishments including up to expulsion, enforcing the policies against groups "such as the Palestine Solidarity Committee and Students for Justice in Palestine" and including the definition of antisemitism that is in the Texas Government Code.

The lawsuit draws a contrast between a 2019 law Abbott signed making college campuses public forums for free speech, and his suppression of anti-Israel speech, which he deems antisemitic. It also draws attention to Abbott's deployment of Texas Department of Public Safety troopers at UT-Austin during pro-Palestinian protests in the past few weeks, which they said further reflects the suppression of anti-Israel speech.

"The events of the last few weeks increased the urgency to challenges to these really extreme efforts to make it impossible to do the normal and typical advocacy things that students do," Abbas said. "Only when it comes to Palestine and Israel."

What constitutes antisemitic speech?

The definition of antisemitism mentioned in Abbott's order is in the Texas Government Code and is pulled from the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, which describes the definition on their website as a "non-legally binding working definition."

"Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic," the Holocaust remembrance alliance's website states . "Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for 'why things go wrong.'"

The site's FAQ states that "claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor" would qualify as antisemitism. "Israel is a racist state" has been chanted during recent pro-Palestinian protests at UT, as has "From the River to the Sea."

The lawsuit states that the definition "once adopted, would transform normal and typical criticism of a foreign country into antisemitism when the foreign country criticized is Israel."

Mahaleris did not answer specific questions about the lawsuit or its criticism that Muslim students don't have the same free speech or safety protections as Jewish students. UT System also declined to comment.

• Free Speech America
• MRC Culture
• MRC Business
• Testimonials
• About NewsBusters Contact Us Advertise Careers Privacy Policy Terms of Use

The mission of the Media Research Center is to document and combat the falsehoods and censorship of the news media, entertainment media and Big Tech in order to defend and preserve America's founding principles and Judeo-Christian values. The MRC is a research and education organization operating under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and contributions to the MRC are tax-deductible.

© 2005-2024, Media Research Center. All Rights Reserved.

Sign up for our NB Daily newsletter to receive the latest news.

No Kidding: Nina Jankowicz Admits DHS Disinfo Police Can’t Even Define Disinfo

Text to Speech

Former director of the defunct Disinformation Governance Board (DGB), Nina Jankowicz, said President Joe Biden’s disinformation policing government does not even have a consistent definition of disinformation.

Rep. Jim Jordan’s House Judiciary Committee released the transcript of Jankowicz's sworn testimony to the committee which it gathered in April 2023. In her testimony, Jankowicz pointed out discrepancies in the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) definition of disinformation. DHS’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency “has one definition, and one of the things that occurred to me while I was at DHS is that different entities were dealing with different definitions,” she said. But according to Jordan, CISA’s definition is merely “anything that they deem false.” 

The leftist disinformation activist said that creating protocols for identifying misinformation, disinformation and misinformation “wasn’t really at the top of the list” of things to do. “And so, to get to identification, you first have to kind of have an agreement about what you're talking about,” said Jankowicz. “You can't say that something is a bear if you don't know what a bear looks like. So that's where we were.”

During the interview, Jordan had Jankowicz read the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency’s definition of disinformation as noted in a CISA memorandum: “[F]alse information that is intentionally or inadvertently injected into the information environment.” Jankowicz, however, described this definition as “overbroad” and indicated that it “ would be fair to say” that DHS was not even using definitions agreed upon within the Orwellian disinformation research community.

She went on to provide her own definitions of mis-, dis- and mal- information. Jankowicz claimed that while mis-, and dis- information both refer to false information, disinformation is intentionally “spread with malign intent” while misinformation is not. Jankowicz defined malinformation as true information that is allegedly “injected into an information environment with ulterior motives.”

During the interview, Jankowicz downplayed the role of the DGB claiming that it “had no operational authority or ability to act as an all-purpose arbiter of truth.” She claimed it merely had the power of suggestion. 

However, The Twitter Files and The Facebook Files have demonstrated just how forceful the federal government’s so-called suggestions can be. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) similarly uncovered internal documents via a whistleblower that showed that the DGB was developing programs and forming relationships with social media companies. Jankowicz however maintains that meetings scheduled with Facebook and Twitter never took place.

But Jankowicz, has a history of supporting censorship and organizations that prop themselves up as arbiters of truth. She was criticized heavily in 2022 for her support of Twitter’s fact-checking program “ Bird Watch ” and “ demoting content .” 

She now runs the gaslighting operation The American Sunlight Project, which specifically works to dispel allegations that “the Federal Government is overseeing a vast censorship regime in coordination with social media platforms, academic institutions, and civil society organizations.”

Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using MRC Free Speech America’s  contact form , and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Donor Privacy Policy

• Nina Jankowicz
• Free Speech

Soros Gave $80M to Groups Calling for Censorship Before 2024 Elections

MRC 2024 Bulldog Award Winners: Hanson, Shapiro, Dillon, Zito, Prager

The Federal Register

The daily journal of the united states government, request access.

Due to aggressive automated scraping of FederalRegister.gov and eCFR.gov, programmatic access to these sites is limited to access to our extensive developer APIs.

If you are human user receiving this message, we can add your IP address to a set of IPs that can access FederalRegister.gov & eCFR.gov; complete the CAPTCHA (bot test) below and click "Request Access". This process will be necessary for each IP address you wish to access the site from, requests are valid for approximately one quarter (three months) after which the process may need to be repeated.

An official website of the United States government.

If you want to request a wider IP range, first request access for your current IP, and then use the "Site Feedback" button found in the lower left-hand side to make the request.