By John Q. Hosedrinker 
In a recent video, six Democratic lawmakers with military or intelligence backgrounds reminded active-duty personnel they can refuse illegal orders, citing concerns about threats to the Constitution. This triggered an extreme response from the right, including former President Trump, who suggested the lawmakers’ actions were punishable by death. The lawmakers were simply reiterating service members’ oath to defend the Constitution and the right to refuse unlawful orders. Trump’s reaction is particularly concerning given his past actions and willingness to politicize the military, making the lawmakers’ warning a necessary one.
Read the original article here
Six lawmakers issued a warning about Trump’s potential actions, and, sadly, events have unfolded that seem to confirm their concerns. The situation, now, is stark. It appears that the very scenario they cautioned against – the potential for unlawful orders and the erosion of the military’s integrity – is a real possibility.
The core of the issue revolves around the idea that the military might be asked to carry out orders that violate the law. The warnings were clear: Trump’s rhetoric and actions, coupled with his supporters’ alarming statements, hint at a willingness to disregard the rule of law. Some believe the existence of “Project 2025,” which proposes a radical restructuring of the federal government, is further evidence that these warnings are being proven correct. The core of “Project 2025” calls for the executive branch to have more control of the US government, which is a cause for alarm because of the potential for abuse of power.
The very fact that some are so outraged at the suggestion that the military should refuse to follow unlawful orders is, in itself, telling. The outrage, at times, is misdirected. The point is not that the military *should* blindly follow orders, but that the military should follow the law. It’s an assertion that the military is meant to obey lawful orders, not all orders. This is the cornerstone of their duty to uphold the Constitution. The worry is that the focus on “order” may come at the expense of “lawfulness.”
There are strong feelings surrounding the idea of Trump giving unlawful orders. It’s difficult to ignore the possibility of unlawful orders. It’s a frightening possibility, and it’s something that has stirred up a lot of emotion. The very notion that Trump might try to circumvent legal processes or abuse his authority is a concern that has been widely voiced. Some believe that the rhetoric of “treason” and “terrorism” is used to paint anyone who disagrees with Trump as an enemy. The Supreme Court’s decision on immunity for actions taken while in office has only made this concern even more pronounced.
The reactions within the military itself are also significant. A high percentage of service members surveyed reportedly understand their obligation to refuse unlawful orders. This demonstrates a deep-seated commitment to the Constitution and to the principles of justice. This is not the time to say Trump proved something 165 years ago. The fact that a significant majority of military personnel prioritize the law over potentially unlawful orders is a positive sign for the country. It reinforces the idea that the military’s integrity and adherence to the law are essential.
The implications of this situation, should unlawful orders be issued, are serious. The military must remain committed to the Constitution and to the principles of lawful governance. There is a general feeling that if the military were to become involved in suppressing dissent or carrying out actions that violate the law, the consequences could be devastating for the country. If the current administration is butchering our General Officer corps and the JAG corps, this will inevitably lead to potential issues.
The concerns extend to the actions of Trump’s supporters. Some are worried that Trump’s supporters may be ready to execute any orders he issues, regardless of their legality. They appear to be in denial of the truth. They do not seem to share the same constitutional values as most Americans. In a situation where the rule of law is being challenged, the voices and actions of those who believe the law is the law are crucial.
Some are worried that the recent events represent a pattern of escalating behavior. The worry is not about *him* but about the power he wields and who enforces it. The overall concern is that the country may be heading down a dangerous path. The current events remind us of the fragility of the rule of law and the importance of vigilance. The oath taken by military personnel, to support and defend the Constitution, is of paramount importance.
In the end, this situation reveals a profound test of American democracy. It’s a test of the military’s integrity, of the commitment to the rule of law, and of the willingness to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. The stakes are high, and the warning from those six lawmakers is becoming increasingly relevant. The hope is that the military will remain steadfast in its commitment to the law.