A group of six Democratic lawmakers with military and intelligence backgrounds has called on service members and intelligence officials to resist any illegal orders that may come from President Donald Trump’s administration. In a video shared on X, Senators Elissa Slotkin and Mark Kelly, along with Representatives Jason Crow, Maggie Goodlander, Chris Deluzio, and Chrissy Houlahan, highlighted what they see as growing threats to the Constitution originating from within the U.S.
The lawmakers emphasized that military personnel do not have to execute orders that breach the law or undermine the Constitution, stating, “Know that we have your back… don’t give up the ship.” However, they did not specify the orders in question, leaving service members to interpret the advice without clear guidance.
According to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, service members are obliged to follow only lawful orders. Adherence to unlawful directives can lead to prosecution, as legal history dating back to the Nuremberg Trials effectively rules that simply obeying orders is not a valid defense against unlawful conduct.
This video comes at a time when U.S. military actions, specifically targeted strikes against suspected drug traffickers in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, have raised legal concerns. These operations have reportedly resulted in over 80 fatalities since September, prompting scrutiny from military officials and allied nations regarding their legality. The Trump administration is also navigating numerous court cases concerning the deployment of military forces on U.S. soil.
In response to the video, Republican lawmakers expressed strong opposition. Senator Marsha Blackburn described it as “inconceivable” for elected officials to advise military members—who take an oath to serve—on defying lawful orders. Senator Lindsey Graham added that the Democratic lawmakers must present specific examples of unlawful orders if they are to support their claims.
The Defense Department cites an opinion from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel as justification for recent military strikes, allowing action against identified cartels across Latin America. Yet, some lawmakers report hearing from Pentagon officials that they often lack specific knowledge about individuals before engaging in operations. It has been revealed that military attorneys did not participate in many recent congressional briefings on this matter which raises further concerns about the legal foundation of these strikes.
Despite requests for briefings from the intelligence community regarding its role in these operations, key lawmakers have reportedly received no responses, with information only being presented by officials from the State Department and the Department of Defense.
As these developments unfold, the call for adherence to the Constitution and legal conduct highlights an important dialogue around the ethical obligations of military personnel, even amidst escalating debates around national security and the use of military power. The situation continues to evolve, sparking significant discussions about lawful governance and accountability in military operations.