An active-duty Air Force officer who was arrested in uniform at the Capitol in July after calling for President Trump’s impeachment made his first comments in court on Friday, in a case that could become a rare test of service members’ right to free speech.
Military prosecutors said during the preliminary hearing that Major Jason Watson betrayed regulations and the Constitution with “vitriolic attacks on the character of the president.” Their arguments came during what is known as an Article 32 hearing, an early step in the military justice process that helps determine whether a case should proceed to a court-martial.
Maj. Watson gave an unsworn statement in his defense, an uncommon move in such hearings. He told the investigating officer overseeing the proceedings, Major Joshua Wendell, that he was driven by his sworn duty to defend the Constitution, not partisanship.
“I spoke to change something I believed was wrong, in the open, under the weight of my own name and my own oath,” Maj. Watson said.
Several of the charges stem from his July arrest at a protest at the Capitol, during which he accused the president of violating the Constitution several times over. He pointed to Mr. Trump’s military actions in Iran and Venezuela, his sweeping immigration crackdown and his dismantling of many parts of the federal government.
Maj. Watson later gave a broadcast interview to CNN in August in which he repeated many of those criticisms, telling the anchor Erin Burnett that the president had failed the country and that he hoped his protest inspired other Americans to act.
Prosecutors also alleged that Maj. Watson was responsible for an anonymous Substack post from June 2025 that called Mr. Trump “a greedy, unintelligent, narcissistic, pathological liar, traitor, and coward.”
In an interview conducted before Maj. Watson was charged, his lawyer, Christopher Mutimer, said the airman was detained on his base the day after the CNN interview, after he reported for duty and informed his chain of command that he would not wear his uniform again. He has remained in pretrial confinement since.
Maj. Watson is charged with 10 violations of the military justice code under Article 88, for using “contemptuous” words against the president or other senior officials; Article 92, for failing to obey orders or regulations; and Article 133, for conduct unbecoming of an officer. He could potentially face years in prison, forfeiture of pay and benefits, and dishonorable discharge.
A member of the public was removed from the courtroom after making a brief interjection during the hearing, which lasted roughly four hours on Friday.
Maj. Wendell, who presided over the proceeding, is expected to recommend later this month whether Maj. Watson’s case should proceed to court-martial. If so, he will also recommend whether it should be a special court-martial, the equivalent of civilian misdemeanor court, or a general court-martial, the equivalent of felony court.
Maj. Wendell said at the hearing that the case centered on the “tension between First Amendment rights and your obligations as a military officer.” Active-duty service members face strict limitations on their ability to publicly dissent or participate in overtly political causes while in uniform. Even so, prosecutions for “contempt toward officials” under Article 88 are exceptionally rare.
Only two convictions under that article have taken place since the Uniform Code of Military Justice went into effect in 1951, said Daniel Maurer, a retired Army Lieutenant Colonel and Judge Advocate who is now an associate professor of law at Ohio Northern University. The first was Lt. Henry Howe, who was convicted following his participation in a 1965 anti-Vietnam War protest during which he carried a sign calling Lyndon B. Johnson’s actions fascist.
The second was Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller, who was an active-duty Marine in 2021 when he posted a series of social media videos, some in uniform, lambasting the Biden administration’s handling of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan. Lt. Col. Scheller’s case played out in a special court-martial. He resigned from the Marines and as part of a plea deal, he pleaded guilty to multiple charges, received a reprimand letter and forfeited $5,000 in pay.
Those social media videos drew praise from Pete Hegseth, and Lt. Col. Scheller became a senior adviser in the Pentagon after Mr. Hegseth became defense secretary.
Maj. Watson’s defense team leaned heavily on the handling of Lt. Col. Scheller’s case during the hearing on Friday, arguing that with it, the government had set a precedent for such prosecutions and that Lt. Col. Scheller’s violations were far more grave — and his charges more numerous — than Maj. Watson’s.
“Can this prosecution be squared with the evenhanded administration of justice?” Mr. Mutimer asked of Maj. Watson’s case, later adding that “what he did, in the end, was speak.”
