The viral video released by six Democratic lawmakers urging military and intelligence personnel to “refuse illegal orders” is more than misguided rhetoric. It is a dangerous, destabilizing appeal that threatens the very foundation of civilian control over the Armed Forces.
As an Army veteran and someone who has served as an Army Judge Advocate, the ramifications of this kind of messaging are not theoretical. They are immediate, and they are alarming. Members of Congress, people sworn to uphold and protect the Constitution, should not be telling the military when it is or isn’t appropriate to follow the direction of the duly elected Commander-in-Chief.
Yet that is precisely the implication of this video, which never references legislation, never provides legal context, and instead presents a dramatic, sweeping call to reject orders that these lawmakers insist are likely to come from a Trump administration. The message is unmistakable: brace yourselves for unlawful orders, and be ready to resist.
This isn’t civic education. It is an incitement of confusion inside the ranks. And in the military, confusion is dangerous.
Enlisted service members already learn their obligations under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, including the clear rule that unlawful orders must not be obeyed. But there is an equally important principle: military orders are presumed lawful, and the determination of legality is not subjective. It does not rest with individual Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, or Guardians. It rests with commanders and the legal advisors trained for that responsibility.
When lawmakers encourage troops to view orders from the President through a partisan lens, they are not reinforcing constitutional duty. They are eroding it.
Imagine the real-world consequences. A company commander issues a lawful order. The unit’s Judge Advocate reviews it and confirms its legality. Yet the Soldier receiving the order refuses, insisting, “Senator Mark Kelly said I don’t have to follow illegal orders from the Trump administration.”
What exactly is that commander supposed to do? How is discipline maintained when elected officials have inserted themselves into the chain of command through a viral political message?
And let’s be clear: Sen. Mark Kelly, a retired Navy captain, remains subject to the UCMJ. Under Article 134, conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline is punishable. Few things are more prejudicial than encouraging service members to preemptively distrust and potentially disobey their Commander-in-Chief.
The seriousness of this breach is reflected in the Defense Department’s own response. As Secretary Pete Hegseth has publicly stated, the department has opened a formal investigation into Sen. Kelly’s conduct, an extraordinary but justified step given that Kelly, as a retired Navy captain, remains subject to the UCMJ. When the Secretary must consider recalling a sitting senator to active duty for potential court-martial, it underscores just how profoundly this kind of political messaging threatens good order and discipline. This is not a partisan dispute. It is a legitimate institutional concern about preserving the integrity of the chain of command.
The legal stakes go even further. Under 18 U.S.C. § 2387, it is a federal crime to advocate or teach the refusal of duty within the military. Telling service members—specifically in the context of a Trump administration—to reject orders approaches that line in a deeply troubling way.
In the military, clarity is essential. Discipline is essential. Trust in the chain of command is essential. This video undermines all three.
Worse, it invites soldiers to weaponize their own personal view of legality. Do these lawmakers truly want rank-and-file troops deciding which orders pass their political or moral test? Do they want troops to feel empowered to refuse orders because they believe congressional Democrats will “have their back”?
That is a path toward a fractured military. One where legality is judged not by law, training, or JAG advice, but by which party a soldier prefers.
If members of Congress believe the President is overstepping, the Constitution already gives them tools – legislation, oversight, and the courts. What it does not authorize is encouraging the military to selectively follow orders based on insinuations of illegitimacy.
The strength of the U.S. Armed Forces lies in its apolitical service and its disciplined obedience to lawful orders. Encouraging troops to preemptively distrust the President’s directives is not patriotic. It is destabilizing, irresponsible, and corrosive to the norms that protect our republic.
The last thing America needs is elected officials injecting partisan suspicion into the chain of command. The military is not a prop for political messaging.
Congress should stop playing with fire.
James Fitzpatrick is an Army Veteran, former appointee in the Trump 45 Administration, and the Director of the Center to Advance Security in America.
Editor's Note: Thanks to President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's leadership, the warrior ethos is coming back to America's military.
Help us report on Trump and Hegesth's successes as they make our military great again. Join Townhall VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member