On November 25, 2023, the FBI initiated a request for interviews with six Democratic U.S. lawmakers who recently released a video message addressing members of the military. In this video, the lawmakers stated that military personnel have the legal right to refuse to execute unlawful orders. A U.S. Justice Department official disclosed this information to Reuters on Tuesday.
This development comes shortly after the Pentagon's warning to Senator Mark Kelly, a Navy veteran and one of the six lawmakers, about the possibility of recalling him to active duty. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth labeled the lawmakers’ video as an act of sedition, further complicating the situation. The FBI is primarily investigating whether any wrongdoing occurred as a result of the lawmakers' statements.
Former President Donald Trump has also weighed in on the matter, accusing the six Democratic lawmakers of sedition. In a social media post, he claimed that such a crime is punishable by death. The Justice Department official, who chose to remain anonymous, emphasized the investigative nature of the FBI's outreach to the lawmakers.
The Democratic lawmakers involved have characterized the Trump administration's threats as intimidation tactics that will ultimately fail to silence their voices. They firmly believe that their video statements accurately reflect U.S. law. American military personnel take an oath to uphold the Constitution, not to serve any individual, including the President. Under military regulations, they are required to follow lawful orders, but they retain the right to refuse orders deemed unlawful.
In addition to Senator Kelly, the video includes statements from Senator Elissa Slotkin, a former CIA analyst and Iraq war veteran, as well as Representatives Jason Crow, Maggie Goodlander, Chris Deluzio, and Chrissy Houlahan, all of whom are military veterans. Senator Kelly is a retired Navy captain and astronaut, further highlighting the military backgrounds of those involved in this controversy.
The video was released against the backdrop of growing concerns among Democrats—and some U.S. military commanders—regarding the legality of the Trump administration's orders to conduct strikes on vessels allegedly linked to drug trafficking in Latin American waters. The Pentagon has defended these strikes, arguing that drug traffickers should be classified as terrorists. Furthermore, Democrats have raised alarms about the legality of using military forces in American cities, suggesting a potential violation of democratic norms.
While sedition is not a charge applicable to civilians under U.S. law, seditious conspiracy carries a maximum penalty of 20 years. Notably, several individuals involved in the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol were convicted of this crime before receiving pardons from Trump. In the military context, the Uniform Code of Military Justice has provisions for sedition, which can include severe penalties, even death.
In a series of social media posts on Tuesday, Representative Chris Deluzio accused Trump of using intimidation tactics to silence dissent among Democrats. He expressed that Trump threatened his life over the constitutional truths he articulated, further highlighting the tense atmosphere surrounding this issue.
Senator Kelly also responded to Hegseth's threats of court-martial by highlighting his extensive record of public service, which includes 39 combat missions during Operation Desert Storm and four space shuttle flights with NASA. "I’ve given too much to this country to be silenced by bullies who care more about their own power than protecting the Constitution," Kelly stated emphatically.
This ongoing situation continues to unfold, raising critical questions about the intersection of military orders, constitutional rights, and political accountability in the United States.