A growing chorus of US veterans and military law experts is condemning Donald Trump after he accused Democratic lawmakers of “sedition, punishable by death” for urging soldiers to refuse unlawful orders. The clash erupted following a video posted by several Democratic lawmakers with military backgrounds, warning service members about the dangers of illegal directives. Trump’s explosive response triggered outrage among retired officers, who say his rhetoric endangers lawmakers, misuses legal terminology, and threatens the military’s long-standing political neutrality. As concerns mount, experts say troops now face unprecedented uncertainty about how to navigate questionable orders under an increasingly politicized command environment.
Lawmakers’ Video Sparks Clash
The dispute began when Democratic lawmakers with military and national security experience, including Representatives Maggie Goodlander, Jason Crow, Chris DeLuzio, and Chrissy Houlahan, along with Senators Mark Kelly and Elissa Slotkin, posted a video addressing US service members. In the clip, they warned, “The administration is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence professionals against American citizens,” and continued, “You must refuse illegal orders.” They did not specify which orders they believed might cross legal lines, but their message followed concerns about Trump deploying the military in American cities during peaceful protests related to an aggressive deportation campaign.
Trump’s Explosive Response
Trump responded furiously on Truth Social, writing, “Seditious behavior, punishable by death!” and adding that the lawmakers “should be arrested and put on trial.” He also reposted another message declaring, “Hang them, George Washington would!” His comments prompted alarm within the military legal community, which warned that such rhetoric distorts the definition of sedition and dangerously escalates political tensions. Critics said the language could place lawmakers’ safety at risk by portraying them as enemies of the state.
Legal Experts Sound Alarm
David Frakt, a retired Air Force officer and former Judge Advocate General attorney, condemned Trump’s language. “He uses sedition and treason very broadly and inappropriately,” he said, noting that the January 6 rioters “were the people that he urged to overthrow the government,” yet Trump now calls them patriots. Frakt warned that Trump’s rhetoric could embolden supporters to target lawmakers by believing they would be pardoned. He also pointed to recent US actions against alleged drug trafficking boats off Venezuela, describing them as “murder, not combat,” and evidence that adherence to the law is being disregarded.
Concerns Over Unlawful Orders
Don Christensen, a retired Air Force colonel and former chief prosecutor, called Trump’s accusation “horribly wrong.” He also criticized Senator Lindsey Graham, a former Air Force attorney, for questioning the lawmakers instead of condemning Trump. Christensen said US strikes on suspected drug boats were “clearly unlawful,” but acknowledged that service members face immense difficulty refusing such orders because the legality would ultimately be adjudicated in court. He warned that troops are placed in a precarious situation when high-ranking leaders blur legal boundaries.
High Bar for Disobeying Orders
Rachel VanLandingham, a retired air force lieutenant colonel and law professor, said the lawmakers’ video failed to explain the strict limits around disobeying orders. She stressed that orders are presumed lawful unless “manifestly, patently unlawful,” the level of clarity seen in the My Lai massacre, where unarmed civilians were murdered. She described the boat strikes as legally “murky,” not an obvious crime. VanLandingham said retired generals should speak publicly about the legal and moral issues instead of issuing broad political calls that could mislead troops.
Eroding Neutrality and Legal Guidance
Coretta Johnson Gray, a former Air Force attorney, said anxiety within the ranks is rising because troops normally do not question whether an order is legal. She noted that there is a vast difference between lethal operations and non-combat support, such as assisting ICE. Gray warned that legal advisers have been fired or demoted under the current administration, heightening fears that the JAG corps is being politicized. She said, “It’s important to have good people who have integrity in these positions,” adding that senior leaders must reaffirm that the military remains politically neutral.
Risks for Junior Troops
Kevin Courtney, a former Marine captain and military attorney, said Trump’s comments create a dangerous environment for junior personnel who lack the experience to navigate conflicting political messages. He cautioned that troops could become divided along partisan lines, following either the president or the lawmakers. Courtney emphasized that “every order is presumed lawful,” except in extreme cases such as an order “to shoot that guy in the street.” He warned that a “10-minute decision” to disobey could take “10 years to really fix,” and said public trust in the military could erode if it becomes viewed as a partisan tool.