President Donald Trump has accused six Democratic lawmakers of engaging in “seditious behavior” after they released a video urging U.S. military personnel to refuse “illegal orders.” The video, which features veterans from the armed services and intelligence community, was first posted on social media by Senator Elissa Slotkin on March 12, 2024. In a dramatic escalation of political rhetoric, Trump suggested that their actions warranted severe consequences, calling the behavior “punishable by DEATH.”
The 90-second video includes messages from Slotkin, Arizona Senator Mark Kelly, and Representatives Jason Crow, Chris Deluzio, Maggie Goodlander, and Chrissy Houlahan. They appeal directly to military members, acknowledging the “enormous stress and pressure” they are under. Slotkin emphasized the need for service members to “stand up for our laws and our Constitution,” a sentiment echoed by the other lawmakers.
This video has gained significant attention, not only for its content but also for its potential political implications. The lawmakers are viewed as possible contenders for higher office, and their message has elevated their profiles amid a politically charged environment.
Trump’s response included a series of posts on social media, where he amplified criticisms of the video and called for the lawmakers’ arrest and trial. He described their message as “really bad, and Dangerous to our Country,” and labeled the lawmakers as “traitors.” The former president’s comments have sparked accusations from Democrats, who claim he is attempting to distract from ongoing investigations related to the late financier Jeffrey Epstein.
Content of the Video and Military Law Implications
In the video, the lawmakers assert that the Trump administration is “pitting our uniformed military against American citizens.” They encourage service members to “refuse illegal orders” and conclude with the phrase, “Don’t give up the ship,” a historical reference that emphasizes loyalty and perseverance.
While the video does not specify any particular orders, it is released during a time when the Trump administration has been attempting to deploy National Guard troops to U.S. cities. Some deployments have faced legal challenges, leading to questions about the legality of such actions.
The U.S. military operates under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), which dictates that service members have an obligation to reject unlawful orders. Commanders typically have legal advisors to consult when determining the legality of orders. However, rank-and-file service members may lack similar access to legal guidance, raising complex issues around compliance and accountability.
Reactions from Political Figures
In response to Trump’s assertions, press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated at a White House briefing that the Democrats’ message could itself be “punishable by law.” She characterized calls to defy lawful orders as dangerous and stated that accountability is necessary for lawmakers who make such appeals.
Democratic leaders have reacted strongly. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer warned that Trump is “lighting a match in a country soaked with political gasoline.” Speaker Mike Johnson defended Trump, arguing that the former president was merely “defining a crime” and labeling the Democrats’ video as “wildly inappropriate.”
Supporters of Trump, including Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff, characterized the video as a call for insurrection. In a Fox News appearance, he described the Democrats’ message as a “general call for rebellion,” asserting that it undermines national security.
The video has also drawn criticism from the Department of Defense. Sean Parnell, a Pentagon spokesperson, stated that U.S. military personnel follow lawful orders and that claims of illegal orders are unfounded.
As this political discourse intensifies, the implications for both the military and the broader political landscape remain to be seen. The confrontation between Trump and the Democratic lawmakers illustrates the deep divisions in U.S. politics, particularly regarding the role of military personnel in domestic affairs.
