This week, Sam and Trevor tackle two Supreme Court cases and then welcome back Mr. Darrel Johnson, the creator of Litigator Libations, to discuss Article 93a, UCMJ. The duo begins with United States v. Hemani, __ U.S. __, No. 24-1234, 2026 U.S. LEXIS 2559 (June 18, 2026). Mr. Hemani was charged with being an "unlawful user" of a controlled substance (i.e., using marijuana every other day) while possessing a firearm, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3). The Court determined that simply being an "unlawful user" was insufficient for the Government to disarm someone. Sam and Trevor believe that Hemani can be used to challenge the permissive interference in marijuana cases, prevent temporary disarmament following a urinalysis or confession of drug use, and inform plea agreements that could impact firearm rights.

The second case they cover is Hunter v. United States, __ U.S. __, No. 24-1063, 2026 U.S. LEXIS 2558 (June 18, 2026). Hunter deals with an appeal waiver contained in a plea agreement that prevented Mr. Hunter from appealing a seemingly unconstitutional sentence provision. The Court held that an agreement not to appeal a sentence is unenforceable when it would result in a miscarriage of justice. Trevor and Sam discuss how Hunter can be used to push back against unfavorable plea terms and the concept of waiver overall.

Darrel takes this episode to the finish line by discussing his recent experience in litigating an Article 93a, UCMJ, case, specifically whether non-commissioned officers who are cross training and going through a "training program for initial career qualification" are "specially protected junior member of the armed forces." We welcome him and anyone else who would like to share their practice tips or military justice thoughts!

Questions, feedback, comments? Send them to litigator.libations@gmail.com!