Pete Hegseth just announced he’s cutting a sitting U.S. Senators military retirement pay. The Senator in question is Mark Kelly, who flew 39 combat missions over Iraq and Kuwait, commanded Space Shuttle missions, and spent 25 years serving in the Navy. His crime? Making a video that reminded service members they have a duty to refuse illegal orders.
The Pentagon is taking administrative action to reduce Kellys retirement pay and has issued a formal letter of censure, placing a written reprimand in his permanent military file. The process could result in a downgrade of Kellys retired rank, which would in turn cut his pension. Lets be clear about what Kelly actually said. Six Democratic lawmakers with military and intelligence backgrounds made a video directed at service members stating: Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders. That’s it. That’s the statement Hegseth is calling seditious.
Here’s what makes this truly insane: refusing illegal orders isn’t some radical interpretation of military law. It’s literally what military law requires.
The duty to obey in the armed forces is governed by the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Articles 90, 91, and 92 require service members to obey lawful orders, creating a duty to disobey patently illegal ones. The Nuremberg trials after World War II established that following orders is not a defense for committing war crimes. This isn’t obscure legal theory. The Manual for Courts-Martial states that the requirement to obey orders does not apply to a patently illegal order, such as one that directs the commission of a crime. Every service member learns this. It’s fundamental to military ethics precisely because we watched what happened when soldiers followed orders without moral consideration in Nazi Germany.
A service member must refuse orders only in cases of patently unlawful actions, in keeping with the Nuremberg principle, according to retired Lt. Col. Rachel VanLandingham, a former judge advocate general in the U.S. Air Force. So Kelly stated established military law. And for that, the man who commanded America’s space shuttle while his wife recovered from an assassination attempt is being punished by Pete Hegseth, whos barely ever commanded anything more consequential than a morning news segment.
Hegseth claims Kellys conduct violated Articles 133 and 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and was seditious in nature. But the irony is stunning. Article 133 addresses conduct unbecoming an officer. Article 134 covers conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. You know what’s actually prejudicial to good order and discipline? Telling troops they can’t cite military law without losing their pensions.
The context matters here. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have raised concerns repeatedly about the legality of US military strikes against suspected drug boats in the Caribbean and the US militarys deployment to cities over the protest of governors. The video was made in response to the U.S. military conducting 20 airstrikes on boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific Ocean against purported drug smugglers, killing scores of people. Kelly wasn’t telling troops to mutiny. He was stating, correctly, that if someone orders you to commit a war crime, you don’t have to do it. And that basic statement of military ethics is now being treated as sedition.
If Pete Hegseth, the most unqualified Secretary of Defense in our countrys history, thinks he can intimidate me with a censure or threats to demote me or prosecute me, he still doesn’t get it, Kelly responded. But heres what should alarm everyone, including the 1.3 million active duty service members and 800,000 reservists currently serving: Pete Hegseth wants to send the message to every single retired servicemember that if they say something he or Donald Trump doesn’t like, they will come after them the same way, Kelly said. It’s outrageous and it is wrong. Hes right. This isn’t really about Kelly.
Think about what this means for the 2 million military retirees drawing pensions. Under current law, if a retiree is deemed to have used contemptuous words against a sitting president or other political leaders, they could receive up to a year of confinement and the forfeiture of all pay and allowances. That threat has always existed in theory. Now the Pentagon is demonstrating it will actually use this power against political opponents.
Restricting freedom of speech of military retirees is unconstitutional and helps stifle the civic interaction of veterans in our political system. But more than that, it creates a chilling effect on the exact kind of moral courage military training is supposed to instill.
We spent decades teaching service members that I was just following orders isn’t a defense. That they have a duty – not just a right, but a duty – to refuse orders that violate the Constitution or laws of war. And now the Pentagon is punishing a Senator for saying that out loud.
The whole thing reeks of political retaliation dressed up as military discipline. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer issued a statement calling the action a despicable act of political retribution and saying Trump is attempting to use the Pentagon as his personal attack dog. The unintended message to every current service member is clear: Dont question. Dont speak up. Dont cite military law if it contradicts what the commander-in-chief wants. Your pension depends on your silence.
That’s the opposite of what we need from our military. We need people who understand the difference between lawful and unlawful orders. We need officers who will push back when asked to do something unconstitutional. We need the moral courage that the Nuremberg principles were designed to protect.
Instead, were getting a Department of War – Trump signed an executive order in September renaming the Department of Defense – that punishes decorated veterans for stating basic military ethics.
Mark Kelly flew combat missions during the Gulf War, made two deployments on the aircraft carrier USS Midway, received two Distinguished Flying Crosses, and commanded four space shuttle missions. He didn’t question orders while serving. He followed them, got shot at, and came home. And now his pension is threatened because he made a video about military law.
If common sense ever returns to the Pentagon, itll find the door locked.