This article addresses the consequences of a failed drug test in the Army National Guard, not active duty service. While both share certain regulations, the National Guard operates under state control unless federally activated, and members are not subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) in the same way active duty soldiers are. Instead, administrative actions are taken under state authority and Army regulations, and outcomes can vary significantly depending on the discretion of the soldier’s chain of command.
That difference matters. A failed drug test in the National Guard does not automatically trigger a court-martial or punitive discharge — but it does begin an administrative process that can end a service member’s military career. For soldiers in the Guard, particularly those serving in states like Washington, Colorado, or D.C., where marijuana is legal under civil law, it can come as a shock to learn that a positive test will still likely result in separation. Regardless of state law, federal standards govern the military. And under those standards, drug use — including cannabis — is incompatible with service.
Immediate Flag and Admin Action
The moment a soldier fails a drug test, a flag is initiated, and they become ineligible for favorable actions. This includes promotions, schools, awards, and bonuses. The flag stays in place while the unit prepares an administrative separation packet — a formal process used to recommend discharge for misconduct.
Unlike active duty service, where military justice proceedings may apply, separation in the National Guard is handled administratively. Soldiers are notified of the intent to separate them and typically offered the chance to consult with an attorney at no cost. But make no mistake — commanders are not required to give anyone a second chance. Regulations authorize separation after one failed test, and whether a soldier remains in uniform depends entirely on the discretion of the unit commander.
Second Chances Are Rare and Uneven
Some commanders believe in rehabilitation. Others believe one strike is one too many. There is no policy that mandates retention after a failed test — only the possibility of retention if a commander deems the soldier worth keeping. That creates wide variation across units and states. Two soldiers in similar circumstances may face dramatically different outcomes depending on their leadership.
This inconsistency is particularly difficult for soldiers who test positive for marijuana in states where it’s legal. In D.C., for instance, residents can lawfully use cannabis — yet a National Guard soldier who does so will still face separation under federal policy. There is no “local pass” or exception because military standards override civil law in this context. Understanding this disconnect is crucial for anyone serving in the Guard.
Building a Case to Stay In
For soldiers hoping to stay in the Guard after a failed test, the path forward is difficult — but not impossible. In our experience, commanders are far more likely to retain a soldier who takes full responsibility, shows initiative, and provides evidence of strong performance and character. That’s why we help soldiers build what we call a “good soldier book” — a collection of evaluations, awards, volunteer work, and character statements that present the full picture of the soldier’s service.
We also advise soldiers to do everything they can to demonstrate contrition and recommitment. Volunteering for additional duties, helping in the armory, showing up early, and expressing a sincere desire to stay in the fight — these are small actions that can leave a big impression. At the end of the day, a commander’s decision often hinges on whether they believe the soldier deserves another shot. And making that case starts with giving them a reason to believe in you.
About the Author: The author is a JAG officer in the Army National Guard, currently serving in the Trial Defense Service. He is a practicing attorney and veteran of overseas deployments, with extensive experience advising and defending soldiers facing administrative and legal challenges. His work focuses on ensuring that servicemembers receive fair treatment and that their rights are protected within the military justice system.
