When Six Members Of Congress Urge The U.S. Military To “Refuse Illegal Orders” Without Naming A Single Illegal Order, That’s Not Patriotism — That’s Destabilization, & It Flirts With Something Far Darker Than Political Disagreement

Friday, November 21, 2025, 2:30 P.M. ET. 5 Minute Read, By Jennifer Hodges, Political Editor: Rnglebrook Independent News,

WASHINGTON, DC.- There are political missteps. There are irresponsible stunts. And then there are actions so dangerously reckless that they shake the foundations of the republic itself.

     What Elissa Slotkin, Mark Kelly, Chris Deluzio, Chrissy Houlahan, Jason Crow, and Maggie Goodlander did this week falls firmly and unapologetically into the third category.

     Their one-minute video, addressed not to their constituents, not to voters, but directly to the U.S. military and intelligence community, is one of the most inflammatory public statements made by sitting members of Congress in modern history.

     The six Democrats told America’s armed forces to “refuse illegal orders,” all while refusing to identify:

• A single illegal order.
• A single violated statute.
• A single abuse of authority.

     Nothing.
     Not one example.

     They aimed a loaded political weapon at the chain of command,  and then pretended they weren’t pulling the trigger.

     This wasn’t courage.
     It wasn’t patriotism.
     It wasn’t a constitutional defense.

It was a dangerous, destabilizing provocation.

     And the country should be alarmed.

The Six Know Exactly What They’re Doing;

     Slotkin, Kelly, Deluzio, Houlahan, Crow, and Goodlander are not naive freshmen newly sworn in. These are individuals with military, intelligence, and national security backgrounds. They understand how service members interpret messages from Washington. They understand the gravity of discussing “illegal orders.”

     And they absolutely understand the power of ambiguity.

     By refusing to name any illegal behavior, they left a vacuum, one that their supporters, political operatives, and even rogue military personnel can fill however they please.

     That is not a constitutional reminder.
     That is an invitation to chaos.

     If a single service member decides that a legitimate presidential directive is “illegal” based on this video?
     That’s not accountability.
     That’s a breakdown in the chain of command.

     And these six Democrats paved the road straight toward it.

This Is Not “Speaking Truth To Power,” It Is Poisoning the Well;

     The United States does not function if soldiers decide for themselves whether to follow orders based on political persuasion.

     Yet that is precisely the environment these lawmakers are stoking.

     They talk about “threats from within” without naming a threat.
     They hint at “dangerous actions” without identifying one.
     They reference “illegal orders” without presenting evidence of any.

     It is political theater masquerading as moral courage, and the consequences could be catastrophic.

     Slotkin and Kelly are former intelligence and military officers.
     Deluzio and Houlahan served in uniform.
     Crow is a former Army Ranger.
     Goodlander worked in military intelligence.

     They, of all people, know how incendiary it is to imply that active-duty service members should brace themselves for illegal commands coming from their own government.

     And they did it anyway.

Republicans Are Right To Demand Accountability, And Maybe More;

     President Trump’s response was explosive, yes, but not irrational.
     He called the six lawmakers “traitors.”
     He demanded consequences.
     He accused them of inciting disobedience within the military.

     And frankly, after watching the video, it’s difficult to argue with the outrage.

Republicans across Congress are now calling for:

• Formal investigations.
• Ethics probes.
• Censure
• Possible expulsion
• And at a minimum, public clarification from the six lawmakers

     Democrats spent four years branding the January 6 riot an “insurrection,” impeaching Trump over it, and championing criminal charges claiming he endangered democracy. Yet now, six of their own have just delivered a message that can be reasonably interpreted as urging the military to question presidential authority.

     The hypocrisy is staggering.
     The danger is real.
     The silence from Democratic leadership is deafening.

Why This Matters, More Than the Democrats Want to Admit;

Civilian Control of the Military Is Non-Negotiable;
     The stability of the United States depends on it. Undermine it even slightly, and the consequences can be permanent.

Ambiguity Is A Weapon, And They Used It.
     A message like this is more dangerous because it is vague. It encourages individual judgment over lawful command.

This Was Aimed At Soldiers, Not Voters.
     That alone sets it apart from everyday political rhetoric.

The Six Democrats Introduced Coup-Adjacent Language.
     They may not like the term. They may reject the implication.
But when elected officials speak directly to troops about refusing unspecified orders, that is the literal vocabulary of governments on the brink.

     And they know it.

The Bottom Line: This Was Not A Warning; It Was a Provocation;

     Slotkin, Kelly, Deluzio, Houlahan, Crow, and Goodlander crossed a boundary that responsible leaders do not cross.

     They injected suspicion into the military.
     They cast doubt on the Commander-in-Chief without evidence.
     They invited interpretation where clarity was required.
     They flirted, recklessly, with rhetoric that democratic nations never use lightly.

     And they did it on purpose.

     Whether out of political desperation, partisan calculation, or ideological fervor, their message was not just irresponsible.

     It was dangerous.
     It was destabilizing.
     And it should never happen again.

     The American public, Congress, and the Pentagon should demand answers.

     Because if this kind of messaging becomes normalized, if lawmakers can whisper suggestions of disobedience into the ears of the military, then the question is no longer whether America can survive polarization.

     The question becomes whether America can survive its leaders.

Editor’s Note:

All statements, names, and descriptions included in this Op-Ed are based on publicly released video, public social-media statements, and verified reporting from national news organizations. The identities and backgrounds of Elissa Slotkin, Mark Kelly, Chris Deluzio, Chrissy Houlahan, Jason Crow, and Maggie Goodlander have been confirmed through those sources. This Op-Ed reflects the author’s analysis under the editorial standards of Jennifer Hodges, Political Editor, Englebrook Independent News.