Senator Elissa Slotkin has defended a recent video in which she and other Democratic veterans reminded military and national security personnel of their duty to refuse unlawful orders, saying it was prompted by months of private concerns raised by active-duty service members, veterans and their families.
Senator Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), a former CIA analyst, appeared in a video released in mid‑November alongside five other Democratic lawmakers who are military or intelligence veterans. In the roughly 90‑second message, the group reminds service members and national security professionals that U.S. law requires them to follow only lawful orders and that they "can" and "must" refuse illegal orders.
The video, posted online on November 18, features Slotkin, Senator Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) and Representatives Jason Crow (D-Colo.), Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.), Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.) and Maggie Goodlander (D-N.H.). They introduce themselves, refer to their oaths to the Constitution and warn that threats to that Constitution can come "from right here at home." At several points, the lawmakers repeat the line, "You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders," and conclude by urging service members, "Don't give up the ship," a historic naval phrase highlighted in coverage of the video by outlets including RealClearPolitics and FactCheck.org.
In a subsequent interview, Slotkin described the video as a response to anxieties she said she had been hearing for months from people in uniform and their families. She recounted that active‑duty personnel, recent veterans and relatives had approached her with questions about the legality of possible missions, including deployments to U.S. cities or participation in operations targeting suspected drug‑trafficking boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific. According to Slotkin, some of those individuals worried they might be ordered to do things they believed were unlawful or outside their training and could not get clear guidance on whether such orders would be legal, echoing concerns she has also raised in public remarks reported by Al Jazeera and The Daily Beast.
Slotkin has said the concerns intensified in the fall, particularly among those involved in or aware of maritime interdiction operations in the Caribbean region. She has pointed to reports that the Trump administration ordered strikes on small boats suspected of smuggling drugs, and she has questioned whether those missions complied with U.S. law and international norms. In describing what she heard from constituents, Slotkin has said some service members asked, in essence: "I don't know if this is legal. I don't know if I'd be held accountable later after this administration. I can't get a straight answer about whether this is legal or not. What do you think we should do?" She has argued that this pattern of questions helped drive her and her colleagues to record the video reminding troops of their obligations under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
The Michigan senator has also stressed in interviews that the video was not triggered by a single documented instance of an illegal order from President Donald Trump. In an appearance on ABC's "This Week," summarized by RealClearPolitics, Slotkin said she was "not aware" of Trump having already given troops unlawful commands but remained "incredibly nervous" about the potential for such orders in the future. She cited historical examples, from Nazi war crimes tried at Nuremberg to the Vietnam War and even popular culture depictions such as the film "A Few Good Men," to argue that "just following orders" is not a defense if those orders are unlawful.
The message drew an immediate political backlash. Trump denounced the lawmakers' video as "seditious" and claimed it was "punishable by death," according to coverage by major outlets including the Associated Press and FactCheck.org. The FBI's counterterrorism division has since contacted the six lawmakers to seek interviews, and internal discussions are under way over whether to open a formal investigation, news organizations such as the Associated Press, Al Jazeera and the New York Post have reported. The Pentagon has also opened a misconduct review focused on Kelly, a retired Navy captain and former astronaut, because as a retired officer he remains subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
Slotkin has argued that the inquiries amount to intimidation and an effort by Trump to weaponize federal law enforcement against political opponents, a characterization she has made publicly and that Al Jazeera and other outlets have quoted. She insists the video simply restated long‑standing legal principles: that U.S. troops swear an oath to the Constitution rather than to any individual president and that they are required to refuse manifestly unlawful orders even as they face discipline for disobeying lawful ones.
Kelly, the only retired service member among the two senators in the group, has faced particular scrutiny because of his continuing obligations under military law. Commentators have noted that as a retired officer still covered by the UCMJ, his participation in a video about refusing orders is being examined more closely by Pentagon investigators than that of his House colleagues, who do not share the same status under military justice rules.