In a forceful escalation of political rhetoric, Donald Trump has publicly accused a group of Democratic lawmakers of “seditious behaviour, punishable by death” after they released a video addressing U.S. military and intelligence-community personnel. 2 The Guardian + Reuters Video, released earlier in the week, encouraged soldiers to abide by the Constitution and reject any orders they consider to be unlawful. It was a message that has provoked sharp criticism of the president. The Washington Post+1
The message and video
The video, posted to social-media by Sen. Elissa Slotkin and featuring six Democratic lawmakers–all with military or intelligence backgrounds–emphasised the constitutional duty of service members to refuse illegal orders. Washington Post+1 The panelists were the senator. Mark Kelly and Representatives Jason Crow, Chris Deluzio Chrissy Houlahan, Chrissy Crow as well as Maggie Goodlander. They said they believed that “threats to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad, but from right here at home” and said that “you can reject illegal orders. Nobody is required to follow orders that are in violation of the Constitution or law.” The Guardian+1
Although the video does not mention specific orders or specific instances of illegitimacy The timing and the manner in which it was broadcast indicate growing concern among a few lawmakers over troop deployments in the United States as well as the legal limitations of the chief’s authority. Al Jazeera+1
Trump’s reaction and the implications
In the aftermath, Trump posted on his social media platform that lawmakers’ actions were “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL” and demanded the lawmakers to be “ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL.” The post that followed was a simple post: “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!” TIME+1 Also, he posted supporter posts in which they demanded that the lawmakers be executed. People.com
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt later clarified that the president wasn’t explicitly calling for executions, but said the statement from lawmakers were “a very dangerous thing for sitting members of Congress to do” because it could encourage military personnel to ignore legal orders. ABC News+1
Democratic leaders have strongly denounced the statements. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called the president’s remarks “an outright threat,” declaring that they increased the likelihood of political violence and eroded democratic rules. The Guardian
Military and legal context
According to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), U.S. military personnel are required to follow lawful orders, whereas legal orders could be denied. The Washington Post+1 However the issue of whether an order is legal usually requires a legal analysis and advice from a military lawyer. From a legal standpoint, the charge of sedition–encouraging insurrection or rebellion against the authority of the United States–can carry severe penalties. News+1 However that the president’s proposal to apply the death penalty to current lawmakers in Congress is a first and has sparked a great deal of worry in the minds of political leaders and scholars alike. Al Jazeera
Greater significance
This incident highlights the growing tensions that are brewing in U.S. politics, particularly in relation to civil-military relations as well as the limitations on executive powers. For the lawmakers the message is to be vigilant concerning the constitutional role played by the military, and it’s freedom from political influence. In the case of President Obama and those who support him the video is presented as a dangerous effort to weaken the command chain and power of the commander in chief.
Conclusion
Trump’s assertion that the video of lawmakers is “seditious behavior, punishable by death” has sparked the debate on democratic rules and veterans in Congress as well as the role played by service members during times of conflict. While the debate continues the main issue the same: how can a democracy keep in balance the responsibility that the military has to adhere to legitimate orders while also fulfilling the constitutional obligation to resist illegal orders? And how much is too far President Trump publicly vilifies the elected officials as traitors who are worthy of execution?