Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth is being sued by a former combat veteran who claims he was the victim of an unconstitutional revenge plot by the Trump administration after he urged military members to “refuse illegal orders.”
Navy veteran-turned-Senator Mark Kelly made the plea alongside five other Democratic lawmakers in a video last year, which prompted Donald Trump to accuse the group of “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”
Hegseth, who initially threatened to court-martial Kelly, was also furious, and this month moved to censure the Arizona senator by downgrading his retirement rank and pay.
“As a retired Navy Captain who is still receiving a military pension, Captain Kelly knows he is still accountable to military justice. And the Department of War — and the American people — expect justice,” Hegseth wrote on X.
But in a 46-page lawsuit filed Monday, Kelly sought to block Hegseth’s actions, arguing they are “unconstitutional and legally baseless.”
He also warned that such actions could have a “chilling” effect, leaving military veterans at risk of having their rank and pay downgraded years after they retire, simply for making comments that he or other defense secretaries dislike.
“It appears that never in our nation’s history has the Executive Branch imposed military sanctions on a Member of Congress for engaging in disfavored political speech,” the lawsuit says.
“If permitted to stand, the Secretary’s censure and the grade-determination proceedings that he has directed will inflict immediate and irreparable harm,” it adds.
“Each of these actions also signals to retired service members and Members of Congress that criticism of the Executive’s use of the armed forces may be met with retaliation through military channels.”
The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and names Hegseth, Navy Secretary John Phelan, and the Department of Defense as defendants.
It centers around a video that Kelly and five of his colleagues posted in November as tensions escalated over the administration’s lethal strikes against alleged drug boats and the military buildup near Venezuela.
At the time, the administration had justified the strikes by insisting that it was waging a war against “narco-terrorists” to stop the flow of drugs into the U.S.
Since then, however, U.S. forces have captured Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro, and Trump has made his motivations clear: to “run” Venezuela for the foreseeable future while seizing its oil as America asserts its dominance in the Western Hemisphere.
In the video, the Democratic lawmakers—all of whom have backgrounds in the military or intelligence—tell viewers: “We know you are under enormous stress and pressure right now. Americans trust their military, but that trust is at risk.
“This administration is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens. Like us, you all swore an oath to protect and defend this Constitution. Right now, the threats to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad but from right here at home. Our laws are clear: You can refuse illegal orders.”
However, Kelly, who retired as a Navy captain in 2011 after 25 years of service, was the only Democratic lawmaker among the six to face adverse action from the Defense Department.
The other five—Elissa Slotkin, Jason Crow, Chrissy Houlahan, Chris Deluzio and Maggie Goodlander—do not draw retirement pay from the military.
The Daily Beast has reached out to the Department of Defense, but it has yet to comment.
