A federal grand jury in Washington declined to indict several Democratic lawmakers after the Justice Department sought charges over a video urging military personnel to refuse unlawful orders. The decision marks a setback for federal prosecutors.
The investigation focused on a clip featuring six Democratic lawmakers, all of whom previously served in the military or intelligence agencies. In the video, they reminded service members of their oath to the Constitution and said they have a duty to reject illegal commands.
What Lawmakers Said in the Video
Sens. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan and Mark Kelly of Arizona appeared alongside Reps. Chris Deluzio, Chrissy Houlahan, Maggie Goodlander, and Jason Crow.
In their message, they argued that threats to the Constitution could come from within the country. They stressed that U.S. law allows troops and intelligence officials to refuse unlawful orders and that upholding the Constitution remains their top responsibility.
DOJ Effort and Political Fallout
According to reports, grand jurors refused to approve charges. It remains unclear which charges prosecutors attempted to bring or whether all six lawmakers were targeted. However, the Justice Department could still try again.
President Donald Trump sharply criticized the lawmakers, calling them traitors and accusing them of sedition. He even suggested they should face execution before later softening those remarks.
Shortly after the controversy escalated, Slotkin received a bomb threat. She later said the grand jury’s decision was a win for free speech and the rule of law.
Kelly also condemned the DOJ’s attempt, calling it an abuse of power. He stated publicly that he would not retreat from his position.
Pentagon Investigation Into Kelly
Separately, the Pentagon launched a review of Kelly’s conduct. Officials cited a federal rule allowing retired service members to be recalled to active duty under certain conditions. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth formally censured Kelly and has sought to retroactively reduce his retired rank.
Hegseth argued that Kelly, as a retired Navy captain receiving a pension, remains subject to military standards.
Kelly responded by filing a lawsuit to block the action. He described the move as unconstitutional retaliation. During a recent court hearing, a judge appeared doubtful of arguments made in defense of the Pentagon’s decision.
