War Dept. Considers Court-Martial Against Retired Dem Officer Over Video
The Department of War has initiated a formal review into Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) after he appeared in a video urging U.S. service members to “refuse illegal orders,” prompting the Pentagon to consider whether the retired Navy captain could face disciplinary action under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
Officials confirmed that the review could result in several potential responses, including recalling Kelly to active duty for a court-martial — a step that has no modern precedent involving a sitting U.S. senator.
In a public statement, the War Department said the matter “will be handled in compliance with military law, ensuring due process and impartiality,” and noted that further comment would be limited in order to preserve the integrity of the ongoing review.
The department also reiterated that military retirees remain subject to the UCMJ, and emphasized that orders issued to active-duty personnel are presumed lawful unless shown otherwise, urging service members to follow established legal channels for questioning orders.
The statement additionally referenced federal statute 18 U.S.C. § 2387, which prohibits efforts to undermine the loyalty or discipline of the U.S. armed forces.
Why Kelly Falls Under Military Jurisdiction
Kelly retired from the Navy with the rank of captain, making him part of the military’s “retired list.” Under longstanding federal law and judicial rulings, retirees who receive military pay remain subject to the UCMJ and may be recalled for disciplinary proceedings in cases involving alleged misconduct.
The Pentagon’s legal authority to do so has been reaffirmed in key appellate cases, including:
-
United States v. Dinger (2018)
-
United States v. Larrabee (2020)
Both rulings held that retirees remain answerable to military courts for offenses committed after leaving active service.
Such recalls are typically rare and reserved for serious cases involving criminal activity, espionage, sexual misconduct, or fraud. A recall involving a sitting senator would represent an unprecedented use of military authority.
The Video That Triggered the Review
The review follows a video released last week by Kelly and five other Democratic lawmakers — all former military or intelligence officials — in which the group addressed current troops and intelligence personnel.
“Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders,” Kelly said in the video.
The lawmakers did not provide examples of any orders they considered illegal, nor did they specify who had issued them. Several participants accused the administration of directing the military against American citizens, though none identified a specific instance.
The message sparked immediate concern within the Pentagon over whether the statements could be interpreted as a call for selective disobedience within the ranks. Military officials have stressed repeatedly that determinations of legality are made through the chain of command and military legal channels, not by individual service members.
Hegseth: Kelly’s Use of Rank “Created Appearance of Authority”
Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said the department is obligated to review whether Kelly used his retired rank to influence active-duty personnel.
“The Department is reviewing his statements and actions, which were addressed directly to all troops while explicitly using his rank and service affiliation — lending the appearance of authority to his words,” Hegseth said.
He added that Kelly’s participation “brings discredit upon the armed forces” and would be addressed according to military law.
Four of the lawmakers in the video previously served in the military but are not retirees and therefore not subject to UCMJ jurisdiction. Sen. Elissa Slotkin, another participant, is a former CIA officer.
Democrats Questioned on Examples of ‘Illegal Orders’
In a series of weekend interviews across major networks, none of the video’s participants identified a specific illegal order issued by President Trump.
During an appearance on MS NOW with Rachel Maddow, Kelly was asked directly whether the group had particular orders in mind that prompted the video. He replied:
“You don’t want to wait for your kid to get hit by a car before you tell them to look both ways.”
Pressed repeatedly, Kelly did not name an illegal order or provide evidence to support the group’s claims.
Sen. Elissa Slotkin, in a separate interview with ABC News, also acknowledged she could not cite any example of an illegal directive coming from the administration.
Republican lawmakers have argued that the absence of supporting evidence indicates the group’s video was a political message rather than a response to specific military concerns, raising additional questions about its appropriateness.
WATCH:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHBVcwDlK1s&pp=ygUWbWFyayBrZWxseSB2aXJhbCB2aWRlbw%3D%3D
Potential Outcomes and Implications
The War Department is considering several potential actions:
-
No disciplinary action
-
Administrative measures, such as a letter of reprimand
-
A formal legal referral to the Department of Justice
-
Recalling Kelly to active duty for a court-martial
Such a recall would be without precedent for a sitting U.S. senator and would likely lead to a complicated constitutional dispute over political speech, military jurisdiction, and the role of retired officers serving in elected office.
According to Pentagon officials, the threshold for determining whether Kelly violated military law may depend on whether his statements are found to have encouraged insubordination, undermined military authority, or violated federal prohibitions on efforts to erode discipline within the ranks.
Legal experts note that while political figures commonly comment on military policy, directly addressing active-duty personnel while invoking military credentials raises unique legal questions.
Uncharted Legal Territory
There is no historical record of a senator being recalled to active duty for disciplinary proceedings. The matter is expected to draw significant attention from constitutional scholars, lawmakers, and military law experts.
As the review proceeds, the War Department says its focus will remain on determining whether Kelly’s actions violated applicable statutes or military regulations governing retired officers.
For now, the department’s position remains unchanged:
“Military retirees remain subject to the UCMJ. Orders are presumed lawful. This matter is under review.”
Emily Johnson is a critically acclaimed essayist and novelist known for her thought-provoking works centered on feminism, women’s rights, and modern relationships. Born and raised in Portland, Oregon, Emily grew up with a deep love of books, often spending her afternoons at her local library. She went on to study literature and gender studies at UCLA, where she became deeply involved in activism and began publishing essays in campus journals. Her debut essay collection, Voices Unbound, struck a chord with readers nationwide for its fearless exploration of gender dynamics, identity, and the challenges faced by women in contemporary society. Emily later transitioned into fiction, writing novels that balance compelling storytelling with social commentary. Her protagonists are often strong, multidimensional women navigating love, ambition, and the struggles of everyday life, making her a favorite among readers who crave authentic, relatable narratives. Critics praise her ability to merge personal intimacy with universal themes. Off the page, Emily is an advocate for women in publishing, leading workshops that encourage young female writers to embrace their voices. She lives in Seattle with her partner and two rescue cats, where she continues to write, teach, and inspire a new generation of storytellers.
