Column By Mike Bibb
Not certain whether President Trump’s claim of accusing various members of Congress and department staff of “sedition” is valid in this particular case. — “Trump wants sedition trial of Sen. Mark Kelly and other vets,” Cronkite News, The Gila Herald, Nov. 24, 2025.
But I sympathize with his sentiments.
As a USMC veteran, I’m totally aware of the military’s position on sedition and those found guilty of it.
If a soldier, sailor, airman, or Marine is prosecuted (Court Martialed) and found guilty, his future is not very bright. In fact, I’d imagine it’s downright unpleasant.
However, I believe Sen. Mark Kelly, a Navy vet, is aware that the penalties for sedition probably no longer apply to him or any other veteran.
Which may be why he’s spouting his thoughts on the matter.
Since Mr. Kelly isn’t an active or reserve member of the military, he can voice whatever opinion he pleases for the simple reason that the 1st Amendment of the Constitution now protects his speech.
Even if he were to yell in the center of a public park that “No military guy, or gal, has to obey an unlawful order from the President of the United States,” his ranting is perfectly permissible.
Unless he physically hurts someone in the process of his protest. Then, it’d become a civil dispute, possibly criminal depending upon the severity of the injury.
A judge may consider at least two issues when deciding if Trump’s complaint against Kelly and others has merit: The “Inactive Duty” status of the individuals, and whether their 1st Amendment right of “free speech” has been violated.
Since Kelly and associates have not taken up arms against the government or advocated violence in expressing their displeasure, but rather only suggested (in their opinion) that military members can refuse to carry out a direct order from their superiors, then it seems doubtful a case would be brought.
Also, how is an enlisted soldier or officer supposed to distinguish an “unlawful order” from a lawful order?
On a field of battle, or a ship at sea, confusion produced from such a situation would inevitably lead to chaos.
“Sedition,” like “Mutiny,” is a serious matter; its adherence could get people killed.
While President Trump is also the Commander-in-Chief of all the Armed Services, he is not the Supreme Court or “King” over the civilian populace.
He is their highest elected representative and subject to the laws, rules, and regulations passed by Congress and signed by the Presidents, past and present.
I certainly do not agree with Sen. Mark Kelly’s views on military personnel refusing orders, but I do recognize his right to say it.
However, if an active Gunnery Sergeant, 2nd Lieutenant, Master Chief, Admiral, or General were to insist that such commands from the President are “unlawful,” I don’t believe it would take long before the MPs arrived to cuff and escort them to the brig.
Then again, things have probably changed a little since I was wearing the uniform nearly 60 years ago.
Update: Apparently, since Sen. Mark Kelly is a retired Navy vet, he’s still subject to the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice). I guess because he receives retirement pay from the Navy and can be recalled to active duty at the Navy’s discretion.
Consequently, he is the only one of the six involved in the “Disobey Order” that can be court-martialled. The other four served in the military but did not retire from the military, and one was in the CIA.
At least, this is how I understand the present situation.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author.
