Appeal Challenges Air Force ROTC Disenrollment Decision—Firm Argues Due Process and Fairness Violated

The Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC has filed an appeal challenging the Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps’ (AFROTC) decision to disenroll a cadet just weeks before his commissioning. The appeal, submitted to the Commander of the Air Force ROTC, calls for reinstatement and correction of the record, citing significant procedural flaws and violations of fairness and due-process principles.

According to the appeal, the former cadet, a first-generation American, had earned a Type II scholarship, served as a Scholastic Officer and head of the Cadet Leadership Council, and was selected to become a Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA) Pilot before his disenrollment in 2024.

The appeal contends that the disenrollment rested on a mischaracterization of events, including an arrest that was later expunged by court order and a minor physical-fitness-test irregularity that the cadet immediately self-reported and retested. The filing argues that Air Force regulations and constitutional standards require decisions to be based on final adjudications, not unproven allegations, and that the cadet’s expunged record cannot lawfully serve as grounds for career-ending action.

Citing Department of the Air Force Manual 36-2032 and AFROTC Instruction 36-2017, the appeal asserts that commanders are improperly instructed to act on “original events” rather than judicial outcomes, contradicting the presumption of innocence guaranteed by the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments. The filing further notes that the cadet’s alleged “breach of contract” for failing to commission in the intended fiscal year was due to court delays outside his control, not misconduct.

Supporting letters from senior officers, describe the cadet as an honest, resilient leader who has demonstrated rehabilitation, faith, and renewed commitment to service.

“Every cadet deserves a fair, fact-based evaluation, not a lifetime penalty for a record the courts have cleared,” said David P. Sheldon, lead counsel on the appeal. “This case is about restoring integrity to the ROTC process and ensuring that deserving young Americans are not barred from serving their country because of bureaucratic error.”

The appeal requests full reinstatement into the AFROTC program or, alternatively, a correction of the official DD Form 785 to allow the cadet future eligibility for Officer Training School.

ABOUT THE LAW OFFICES OF DAVID P. SHELDON, PLLC

Based in Washington, D.C., the Law Offices of David P. Sheldon represents service members, cadets, and federal employees in military and administrative law matters worldwide. The firm has built a national reputation for defending the rights and careers of those who serve.

DISCLAIMER

This press release is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The outcome of any case depends on its specific facts and applicable law. Reading this release does not create an attorney-client relationship. Individuals facing ROTC disenrollment or similar administrative action should consult qualified counsel for legal guidance regarding their particular circumstances.

 

Centralizing Coast Guard Legal Processes Will Severely Undermine Coasties Seeking Justice

When you serve in the Coast Guard, especially out in remote sectors or small boat stations, you learn to depend on your crew, your command, and your local support systems. That includes legal support. So, when the Coast Guard announced it was centralizing Enlisted Administrative Separation Boards,  its legal services, shifting key functions and case processing to a single hub, many in the ranks raised an eyebrow. And they should. Because while this move may look like “streamlining” from the top, for the average enlisted Coastie trying to fight to be retained, it feels more like the Coast Guard just pulled up the ladder.

Let’s be real: Coasties want to serve the Nation and when that is challenged, what they need is access to attorneys who understand their case, to an advocate who knows the local command climate, and to someone who can walk them through the complex processes without judgment or delay.

But with centralization, all of that becomes harder.

Instead of walking down the hallway to meet with a legal officer or reaching out to a JAG familiar with their unit, members now face a faceless, distant bureaucracy. Legal processing centers won’t have the context of the cutter you served on, the command climate you endured, or the operational pressures you faced. They won’t know the nuances of your unit’s leadership or the unique dynamics of life in the CG. Most importantly, they won’t know you.  And that lack of context can mean the difference between being heard or being dismissed.

The impact isn’t just emotional. It’s procedural. Under centralization, communication will flow through generic portals, and not trustworthy legal officers. And for members in isolated duty stations or afloat commands, just getting a response in a timely manner could become its own battle.

Access to justice shouldn’t depend on your zip code or how far you are from a legal office. But this move risks exactly that. It creates a new kind of inequity within the ranks where some Coasties, based on location or assignment, have less meaningful access to legal redress than others. That’s not just bad policy; it’s a threat to due process.

Federal courts have long upheld the principle that service members, though operating within a unique system, are still entitled to fundamental fairness in administrative actions and legal review. When the system becomes so distant and complex that members can’t effectively navigate it, it raises serious questions about whether that fairness is being upheld.

Even more concerning, centralization also raises the very real possibility of Unlawful Command Influence.  Rather than having Board members selected from local commands, presumably members are now generated from USCG Headquarters.  USCGHQ already have an incredible amount of discretion in approving Board separation results.  This will certainly undermine the fairness of the Board process and that is going to mean Coasties do not get a fair shake.

We’ve seen this before in other branches, where so-called “efficiencies” made it harder for service members to be heard. Coast Guard members deserve better. They deserve legal access that is local, personal, and responsive. They deserve a system that understands their lives, not just their case numbers.

This centralization plan may serve bureaucratic goals, but it does so at the cost of individual rights. The Coast Guard can do better. It must.

Because when justice is out of reach, morale sinks, trust erodes and that makes every mission harder.

About The Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC:
Located in Washington, D.C., The Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC, represents service members from all branches of the U.S. Armed Forces, including the U.S. Coast Guard. We specialize in military justice, appeals, boards of correction, and federal employment law. With decades of experience, our team is dedicated to defending the rights and careers of those who serve.

Disclaimer:
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. If you are a Coast Guard member facing legal challenges or considering filing a complaint, you should seek advice from an attorney experienced in military law.

Commissioning Restored: Legal Advocacy Secures Future for Disenrolled ROTC Cadet

When a promising ROTC cadet faced sudden disenrollment just days before his scheduled commissioning and college graduation, it nearly derailed years of dedication, training, and commitment to military service. But with the support of his family and the swift intervention of the Law Offices of David P. Sheldon PLLC, justice prevailed.

This case, led by Attorney David P. Sheldon, is a reminder of the stakes involved when ROTC disenrollment actions occur without a full and fair understanding of the facts. And more importantly, it demonstrates how legal support can make the difference between a lost opportunity and a restored future.

“The Law Office of David Sheldon is nothing short of responsive, professional, and deeply committed when it comes to representing their clients,” shared the cadet’s mother. “Thanks to Mr. Sheldon and his team, our son was given back his chance to serve.”

A Misjudged Moment with Major Consequences

The cadet had a long-standing record of strong academic performance, demonstrated leadership, and unwavering commitment to his service branch. However, in the final week before commissioning, a procedural misunderstanding and a misinterpretation of events led his detachment to pursue disenrollment based on concerns that did not reflect his true conduct or character.

Without legal intervention, these types of allegations, especially when raised so close to graduation can lead to devastating outcomes. In this case, the cadet’s future service, graduation standing, and career trajectory were all placed at risk.

“They listened to us, answered every question, and most importantly, they believed in our son when others didn’t,” said the cadet’s mother.

Standing Up for Integrity, Due Process, and Leadership Potential

The Law Offices of David P. Sheldon worked quickly to ensure the cadet’s record and intentions were accurately represented. Through a combination of legal advocacy, supporting testimony, and thorough documentation, the firm ensured that his conduct was reviewed in full context.

Multiple community members and mentors provided strong character references, attesting to the cadet’s fitness for service and his long-standing desire to serve his country. These efforts helped create a balanced view that ultimately enabled ROTC leadership to revisit their decision.

“This was never about just fixing a mistake,” said Attorney David P. Sheldon. “It was about ensuring that a capable and committed future officer was not denied his rightful opportunity to serve based on an incomplete or unfair process.”

The Outcome: Commissioning Achieved, Future Secured

Although the cadet was unable to commission on his originally scheduled date, the firm’s legal efforts led to a reversal within 48 hours. He officially entered active duty just days later and now serves proudly in the U.S. Air Force.

This case stands as a powerful reminder: disenrollment decisions—especially those made under pressure or without full context—must be carefully examined. Cadets and their families should know that they have the right to contest those decisions, and that competent legal counsel can make all the difference.

“Justice was served,” the family shared. “Thanks to this team, our son is fulfilling his dream and wearing the uniform with pride.”