A federal appellate panel expressed strong skepticism regarding the disciplinary action against Senator Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., for his remarks on troops refusing illegal orders. The judges questioned the Department of Justice’s argument that Kelly’s statement, “you can refuse illegal orders,” was intended to encourage disobedience of lawful orders. The panel highlighted that Kelly’s statement aligns with military training and questioned the basis for the Defense Secretary’s inference of intent, particularly since Kelly is a retired service member.
Read More
US troops could disobey questionable orders, a concept that’s surfacing in discussions fueled by the recent words of a Catholic Archbishop. The core of the matter, as I understand it, is whether soldiers are bound to follow *all* orders, regardless of their nature, or if they have a moral and perhaps even a legal obligation to refuse those that are considered wrong. This question is particularly pertinent in a climate where trust in leadership might be wavering. It’s not a simple question of legality; the moral compass of the individual soldier is undeniably a factor.
It’s important to remember that the Archbishop isn’t just saying troops *could* disobey; the very oath of enlistment and the Uniform Code of Military Justice, or UCMJ, are critical here.… Continue reading
Responding to a video featuring six Democratic lawmakers urging service members to “refuse illegal orders” from former President Trump, Rep. Adam Smith stated he believes Trump has issued illegal military orders. Smith cited a specific instance, the order to blow up boats in the Caribbean without proper justification, as an example. He condemned the Department of War’s review into Sen. Mark Kelly’s participation in the video, deeming it a threat to free speech. While Smith expressed his views, Sen. Elissa Slotkin, also in the video, stated she was not aware of any illegal military orders from the former president.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood