Who is Mark Kelly, and why is the US senator accused of ‘sedition’? pssss
Who is Mark Kelly, and why is the US senator accused of ‘sedition’?
In a video, six Democratic lawmakers who held military and intelligence positions say ‘illegal orders’ can be refused by soldiers.
The United States Department of Defense has launched an investigation into Senator Mark Kelly over a video in which he and other Democrats urged soldiers to defy “illegal orders”.
The video was released last week. It features six Democratic lawmakers who previously held positions in the military and intelligence services: Kelly, Representatives Chris Deluzio and Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, Representative Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire, Representative Jason Crow of Colorado and Senator Elissa Slotkin of Michigan.
Slotkin wrote on X in a post accompanying the video that they wanted to “speak directly to members of the military and the intelligence community”.
“The American people need you to stand up for our laws and our Constitution. Don’t give up the ship,” Slotkin wrote.
In the video, the lawmakers said the trust that citizens have in the US military and intelligence agencies was “at risk”.
“This administration is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens,” the lawmakers said.
“Like us, you all swore an oath to protect and defend this constitution. Right now, the threats to our constitution aren’t just coming from abroad but right here at home,” the video added.
“Our laws are clear: You can refuse illegal orders.”
In response to the video, the Pentagon has announced an investigation into alleged breaches of military law by Kelly, a former navy captain, which is an unusual step against retired military personnel.
According to the US Manual for Courts-Martial, which outlines conduct in the military: “An order requiring the performance of a military duty or act may be inferred to be lawful and it is disobeyed at the peril of the subordinate.”
However, that inference does not apply if an order is contrary to the constitution or US law, is given by an officer without the authority to issue it or is “patently illegal”, such as ordering the commission of a crime.
Here’s everything we know:
Who is Mark Kelly?
The Arizona senator is a former senior navy officer and pilot who flew combat missions in the first Gulf War.
In 2001, Kelly became an astronaut and flew four space shuttle missions over a decade, two of which were as commander.
In 2011, Kelly retired as a captain, a rank just below rear admiral.
In his first Senate campaign in 2020, Kelly finished the term of Republican Senator John McCain, who died in office. Two years later, Kelly was re-elected to a full term. In the Senate, he has focused on national security and the military.
Is Kelly right about ‘illegal orders’?
According to Bruce Fein, a lawyer specialising in constitutional and international law and who served as Associate Deputy Attorney General at the Department of Justice under former President Ronald Reagan, Kelly was “simply echoing the law”.
“[For example] a member of the United States Armed Forces is required to disobey a clearly illegal order of a superior. There is no ‘following orders’ defence,” Fein told Al Jazeera.
“Lt William Calley was convicted of war crimes for the [1968] My Lai Massacre against civilians in Vietnam. His ‘following orders’ defence was rejected,” he added.
What is the Pentagon investigation about, then?
In a statement posted on X on Monday, the Pentagon said it had received “serious allegations of misconduct” against Kelly, suggesting that the video had interfered with the “loyalty, morale, or good order and discipline of the armed forces”.
“A thorough review of these allegations has been initiated to determine further actions, which may include recall to active duty for court-martial proceedings or administrative measures. This matter will be handled in compliance with military law, ensuring due process and impartiality,” the statement read.
“All service members are reminded that they have a legal obligation under the UCMJ [Uniform Code of Military Justice] to obey lawful orders and that orders are presumed to be lawful. A service member’s personal philosophy does not justify or excuse the disobedience of an otherwise lawful order,” it added.
On the same day, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth wrote on X that the “seditious six” lawmakers in the video were “despicable, reckless, and false”.
“Encouraging our warriors to ignore the orders of their Commanders undermines every aspect of ‘good order and discipline.’ Their foolish screed sows doubt and confusion – which only puts our warriors in danger,” Hegseth said, adding that only Kelly falls under the Department of Defense’s jurisdiction.
“Kelly’s conduct brings discredit upon the armed forces and will be addressed appropriately,” Hegseth said.
While all six lawmakers served in the military or intelligence agencies, Kelly is the only person to have formally retired from the military, meaning he can still be recalled for active duty or face a court martial for misconduct.
What has Kelly said about the action against him?
In a post on X on Monday, Kelly wrote that he had “sworn an oath to the Constitution in 1986”.
“I’ve upheld it through 25 years of service and every day since I retired. If [President Donald] Trump’s trying to intimidate me, it won’t work. I’ve given too much to our country to be silenced by bullies who care more about power than the Constitution,” he said.
In a post last week, Kelly wrote he “had a missile blow up next to my airplane, been shot at dozens of times by anti-aircraft fire, and launched into orbit – all for my country”.
“I never thought I’d see a President call for my execution. Trump doesn’t understand the Constitution, and we’re all less safe for it,” he said.
What has Trump said?
In a post on his Truth Social platform last week, the president wrote that the video was “really bad, and Dangerous to our Country”.
“SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR FROM TRAITORS!!!” he said. In a separate post, Trump added that it was “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH”.
But a day after his comments, Trump told Fox News that he wasn’t threatening death but the Democrats were in “serious trouble”.
When asked how far the Trump administration could realistically take its action against Kelly, Fein said it could “harass Kelly with a spurious investigation or charges”.
Why is the Trump administration focusing on this?
The fury over the video comes at a time when the US military is conducting strikes on vessels that the Trump administration has alleged are carrying drugs.
The strikes have killed at least 83 people in the Pacific Ocean and Caribbean Sea.
At the end of October, Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee called on the Department of Justice (DOJ) to hand over all legal opinions on the legality of the military’s strikes.
“Summarily killing criminal suspects is prohibited under domestic and international law in both peacetime and wartime,” they wrote in a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi that the Reuters news agency saw.
But two weeks ago, a memo from the DOJ stated that service members could not be prosecuted for the killings.
“The strikes were ordered consistent with the laws of armed conflict, and as such are lawful orders. Military personnel are legally obligated to follow lawful orders and, as such, are not subject to prosecution for following lawful orders,” The Hill, a US political website, reported, citing a statement from a DOJ spokesperson.
Pentagon says it’s investigating Sen. Mark Kelly over video urging troops to defy ‘illegal orders’
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Pentagon announced Monday it is investigating Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona over possible breaches of military law after the former Navy pilot joined a handful of other lawmakers in a video that called for troops to defy “illegal orders.”
The Pentagon’s statement, posted on social media, cited a federal law that allows retired service members to be recalled to active duty on orders of the defense secretary for possible court martial or other measures.
It is extraordinary for the Pentagon, which until President Donald Trump’s second term had usually gone out of its way to act and appear apolitical, to directly threaten a sitting member of Congress with investigation. It comes after Trump ramped up the rhetoric by accusing the lawmakers of sedition “punishable by DEATH” in a social media post days after the video was released last week.
In its statement Monday, the Pentagon suggested that Kelly’s statements in the video interfered with the “loyalty, morale, or good order and discipline of the armed forces” by citing the federal law that prohibits such actions.
“A thorough review of these allegations has been initiated to determine further actions, which may include recall to active duty for court-martial proceedings or administrative measures,” the statement said.
Kelly said he upheld his oath to the Constitution and dismissed the Pentagon investigation as the work of “bullies.”
“If this is meant to intimidate me and other members of Congress from doing our jobs and holding this administration accountable, it won’t work,” Kelly said in a statement.
What the lawmakers said in the video
Kelly was one of six Democratic lawmakers who have served in the military or intelligence community to speak “directly to members of the military.” The other lawmakers are Sen. Elissa Slotkin and Reps. Jason Crow, Chris Deluzio, Maggie Goodlander and Chrissy Houlahan, who are seen as possible future aspirants for higher office and elevated their political profiles with the video’s wide exposure.
Kelly, who was a fighter pilot before becoming an astronaut and then retiring at the rank of captain, told troops that “you can refuse illegal orders,” while other lawmakers in the video said they needed troops to “stand up for our laws … our Constitution.”
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Kelly was facing investigation because he is the only one of the lawmakers who formally retired from the military and is still under the Pentagon’s jurisdiction.
“Kelly’s conduct brings discredit upon the armed forces and will be addressed appropriately,” Hegseth said on his personal X account. Of the wider group, he added that “their foolish screed sows doubt and confusion — which only puts our warriors in danger.”
Kelly and the other lawmakers didn’t mention specific circumstances in the video, but its release comes as the Trump administration has ordered the military to blow up small boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean accused of ferrying drugs and continues its attempts at deploying National Guard troops into U.S. cities despite some legal setbacks.
Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said last week that “our military follows orders, and our civilians give legal orders.”
Other Senate Democrats came to Kelly’s defense, with Democratic leader Chuck Schumer accusing Trump of using the Pentagon “as his personal attack dog” and saying “this is what dictators do.”
His fellow Democratic Arizona senator, Ruben Gallego, said “Mark told the truth — in America, we swear an oath to the Constitution, not wannabe kings.”
What legal scholars say
In the past decade, there has been “a quiet but significant uptick in courts-martial of retired servicemembers, even for post-retirement offenses,” Stephen Vladeck, a Georgetown University law professor, said in an email. He said there has been debate in the courts about their constitutionality but the practice is currently allowed.
But Kelly’s status as a U.S. senator could complicate the Pentagon’s investigation because the Constitution explicitly shields members of Congress from White House overreach, said Anthony Michael Kreis, a constitutional law professor at Georgia State University.
“Having a United States senator subject to discipline at the behest of the secretary of defense and the president — that violates a core principle of legislative independence,” Kreis said in a phone interview.
Kreis said such protections were a reaction to the British monarchy, which had arbitrarily punished members of Parliament.
”Any way you cut it, the Constitution is fundamentally structurally designed to prevent this kind of abuse from happening,” Kreis said.
Troops can reject unlawful orders
Troops, especially uniformed commanders, do have specific obligations to reject orders that are unlawful, if they make that determination.
While commanders have military lawyers on their staffs to consult with in making such a determination, rank-and-file troops who are tasked with carrying out those orders are rarely in a similar position and often have to rely on their superiors.
Broad legal precedence also holds that just following orders — colloquially known as the “Nuremberg defense,” as it was used unsuccessfully by senior Nazi officials to justify their actions under Adolf Hitler — doesn’t absolve troops.
May you like
Yet, there has been little reaction online from troops to the lawmakers’ video.
A former service member who helps run an online military forum and spoke on condition of anonymity to avoid retaliation said the lawmakers’ message is unlikely even to reach troops because the video was posted only on X and was far too long to be reposted on platforms like TikTok where troops actually consume information.
