UCMJ Article 117a: Wrongful Broadcast or Distribution of Intimate Visual Images

Article 117a of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, codified at 10 U.S.C. 917a, is the military offense most often described in plain language as the prohibition on “revenge porn.” It punishes a service member who knowingly and wrongfully shares an intimate image of an identifiable adult who kept a reasonable expectation of privacy, where the sharing was likely to cause harm and had a connection to the military environment. The article fills a gap that older law left open: it reaches the non-consensual release of an image that may have been created consensually, which is a different wrong from secretly recording someone.

Article 117a is a relatively new addition to the Code. Congress created it in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018, Public Law 115-91, signed December 12, 2017, in the aftermath of the “Marines United” online scandal in which intimate images of service members were circulated without consent. As part of the broader punitive-article restructuring under the Military Justice Act of 2016, it became effective for offenses committed on or after January 1, 2019. Material describing the law before that date will not reflect this offense.

What the article actually covers

The conduct Article 117a targets is the act of broadcasting or distributing an intimate image, not the act of taking it. The statute defines its key terms with precision. To “broadcast” means to electronically transmit a visual image with the intent that it be viewed by a person or persons. To “distribute” means to deliver an image to the actual or constructive possession of another person, which includes transmission by mail or electronic means. A “visual image” includes a photograph, film, video, or any digital or computer image or recording, as well as data capable of being converted into such an image.

The subject of the image must be an “intimate visual image,” which the statute defines as a visual image that depicts a private area of a person. A “private area” is defined as the naked or underwear-clad genitalia, anus, buttocks, or female areola or nipple. The article also reaches a visual image of sexually explicit conduct. Because the offense is about distribution rather than creation, it applies even when the image was made with full consent. The injury Article 117a addresses is the betrayal of that consent through unauthorized sharing.

What the government must prove

A prosecution under Article 117a is built from several distinct elements, each of which the government must establish. The statute sets them out as conditions that must all be satisfied.

First, the accused knowingly and wrongfully broadcast or distributed an intimate visual image of another person, or a visual image of sexually explicit conduct. The person depicted must be at least eighteen years old at the time the image was created, must be identifiable from the image itself or from information displayed in connection with it, and must not have explicitly consented to the broadcast or distribution.

Second, the accused knew or reasonably should have known that the image was made under circumstances in which the person depicted retained a reasonable expectation of privacy. The statute defines that expectation by reference to the circumstances in which a reasonable person would believe that the image would not be made public or broadcast.

Third, the accused knew or reasonably should have known that the broadcast or distribution was likely to produce a defined kind of damage. The statute describes this as conduct likely to cause harm, harassment, intimidation, emotional distress, or financial loss to the person depicted, or to harm that person’s reputation. This element ties the offense to its purpose: it is not a general decency rule but a protection against the targeted use of private images as a weapon.

Fourth, the accused’s conduct, under the circumstances, had a reasonably direct and palpable connection to a military mission or military environment. This military-nexus element is what places the offense inside the UCMJ rather than leaving it to civilian law. The Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces has noted that this element does the jurisdictional work that, for offenses charged under the general article, would be supplied by a finding that the conduct was prejudicial to good order and discipline or service-discrediting. Article 117a, by contrast, contains its own distinct connection requirement and does not import the general-article terminal element.

Maximum punishment

Article 117a does not set its own numeric maximum in the statutory text; it provides that an offender shall be punished as a court-martial may direct, with the actual ceiling fixed by the Manual for Courts-Martial. For offenses committed before December 27, 2023, the Manual’s maximum punishment for wrongful broadcast or distribution of intimate visual images was a dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement for two years, and reduction to the lowest enlisted grade. For offenses committed on or after December 27, 2023, sentencing is governed by the segmented sentencing parameters of the 2024 Manual, under which a military judge imposes the sentence within the category assigned to the offense. Because the 2024 Manual restructured several maxima, the precise confinement range for a given case should be confirmed against the current Manual and the sentencing parameters that apply to the offense date.

Defenses and limits of the offense

Defenses track the elements. A central limit is consent: if the person depicted explicitly consented to the broadcast or distribution, the offense is not made out. Disputes often turn on the scope of any consent, because consent to create or to privately share an image is not consent to broadcast it widely. The age requirement is also a hard limit on this article. Article 117a applies only where the person depicted was at least eighteen when the image was created; conduct involving a minor is addressed by other, more serious provisions of law rather than by this article.

The reasonable-expectation-of-privacy element supplies another line of defense. Where the image was already public, or was made in circumstances in which no reasonable person would expect privacy, that element is not satisfied. The identifiability requirement matters as well: if the person cannot be identified from the image or accompanying information, the statute’s protection is not triggered. Finally, the required state of mind means that purely inadvertent conduct, without knowledge or a reasonable basis to know the privacy and harm circumstances, falls outside the offense.

How Article 117a relates to other offenses

Article 117a is frequently confused with Article 120c, 10 U.S.C. 920c, which covers other sexual misconduct including indecent viewing, visual recording, and broadcasting. The distinction is the point at which the wrong occurs. Article 120c addresses the non-consensual viewing, photographing, or recording of a person’s private area, and the broadcasting of such a recording, where the image itself was obtained without consent. Article 117a addresses the downstream distribution of an intimate image, including one that may have been created with the subject’s consent, once that image is shared without consent in a way connected to the military environment. The two articles can overlap on a single set of facts, but they protect against different stages of harm. Conduct that does not satisfy Article 117a’s specific elements may still be charged under the general article, Article 134, where the government can prove a terminal element. Article 117a is also one of the “covered offenses” assigned to the independent Office of Special Trial Counsel under Article 24a for offenses committed on or after December 27, 2023, meaning the charging decision for qualifying cases rests with special trial counsel rather than the accused’s commander.

Sources

• 10 U.S.C. 917a (Article 117a, Wrongful broadcast or distribution of intimate visual images), Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/917a
• Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2024 edition), Part IV, Joint Service Committee on Military Justice: https://jsc.defense.gov/Military-Law/Current-Publications-and-Updates/
• Updates to UCMJ criminalize unauthorized distribution of sexual imagery, U.S. Army: https://www.army.mil/article/200539/updatestoucmjcriminalizeunauthorizeddistributionofsexualimagery

This article is for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice. It describes military law and procedure of public record, does not address any individual case, and does not create an attorney-client relationship.