US Judge Blocks Pentagon Bid to Punish Senator Mark Kelly Over Video
A US federal judge has issued a preliminary ruling to block the Pentagon from reducing Senator Mark Kelly's retired military rank and pension pay. This decision comes after Kelly, an Arizona Democrat and retired navy captain, appeared in a video urging troops to reject unlawful orders.
Legal Setback for Trump Administration
Judge Richard Leon, appointed by George W. Bush, delivered the ruling on Thursday, reprimanding Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth for his attempt to penalise Kelly. The judge stated that Hegseth had "trampled" on Kelly's First Amendment rights and "threatened the constitutional liberties of millions of military retirees."
This ruling represents the latest setback for Donald Trump and his allies in their campaign against perceived political enemies. It has drawn opposition from judges across the ideological spectrum, highlighting broader tensions over free speech and military discipline.
Background of the Controversy
In November, Kelly was one of six congressional Democrats who featured in a video reminding service members of their duty to reject unlawful orders. Kelly explicitly stated in the clip: "Our laws are clear: you can refuse illegal orders."
The video emerged as Democrats criticised Trump's deployment of national guard troops in US cities and the authorisation of lethal strikes on boats suspected of drug smuggling from Latin America. In response, Trump labelled the video "SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH" in a social media post.
Pentagon's Actions and Legal Response
On 5 January, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a censure letter, asserting that Kelly had "clearly intended to undermine good order and military discipline" in violation of military rules applicable to both active and retired personnel. Kelly filed a lawsuit against Hegseth's attempt to reduce his rank and pension a week later.
Trump administration lawyers urged the judge to dismiss the lawsuit, calling it a "quintessential matter of military discipline not within the judiciary's purview." They also argued the lawsuit was premature, as Kelly had not been formally censured and should have responded through administrative channels.
Broader Implications and Reactions
Earlier this week, a grand jury in Washington DC declined to indict the six members of Congress featured in the video, including Kelly, Michigan senator Elissa Slotkin, and several House members. This decision, combined with Judge Leon's ruling, serves as a stark rebuke of the Trump administration's efforts to criminalise dissent.
Senator Slotkin commented on the grand jury's decision, saying, "It's just a sad moment when anonymous grand jurors, just citizens called at random in Washington DC, have more bravery to uphold the basic rule of law and stand for that than some of our colleagues here in the Senate."
Judge's Strong Rebuke
In his ruling, Judge Leon admonished Hegseth for his handling of the issue, writing that "rather than trying to shrink the first amendment liberties of retired servicemembers, Secretary Hegseth and his fellow defendants might reflect and be grateful for the wisdom and expertise that retired servicemembers have brought to public discussions and debate on military matters in our nation over the past 250 years."
He continued, "If so, they will more fully appreciate why the Founding Fathers made free speech the first amendment in the Bill of Rights. Hopefully this injunction will in some way help bring about a course correction in the defense department's approach to these issues."
The case underscores ongoing debates about free speech, military authority, and political retaliation in the US, with significant implications for retired service members and constitutional protections.
