As a former Army judge advocate and current scholar of military law, Professor Carpenter was cited in three separate articles by Military.com between March 21 and March 26, 2025. His perspective added essential legal and ethical context to breaking stories surrounding political speech restrictions in the military, operational security failures at the highest levels of government, and issues of accountability across military ranks.
In a March 21 article, Carpenter addressed newly released memos from the Air Force and Navy warning troops about the limits of political expression. While some legal experts saw the language as overly cautionary, Carpenter offered a balanced interpretation, emphasizing that “Airmen can still talk about their political feelings… They just can’t get on stage and say it.” He clarified that the memos served more as reminders of existing boundaries than as new threats to service members’ rights.
Days later, Carpenter was quoted again in coverage of a controversial Signal chat involving top government officials, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. The group reportedly used the encrypted app to discuss sensitive military plans for airstrikes in Yemen. Carpenter expressed concern over the breach of protocol, noting, “If a service member were to do something similar, they would be facing a court-martial.”
In a follow-up article on March 26, Carpenter addressed the broader implications of the incident, including the perceived double standard in how such violations are handled depending on rank. “The old phrase is ‘different spanks for different ranks,’” he said. “With privilege comes the ability to get out of consequences.” His commentary highlighted the challenges that military leaders now face in enforcing operational security standards among lower-ranking personnel in the wake of the scandal.
Professor Carpenter was also quoted in the April 3, 2025 story “Commander of Air Force Weather Wing Fired After Legal Troubles Earlier This Year.” In this article, Carpenter states that it’s common for the military to take up cases dropped by civilian authorities and that they often result in convictions.