Pentagon’s Censure of Senator Challenged in Court
A federal judge expressed doubts regarding the Pentagon’s censure of Senator Mark Kelly, raising questions about the lack of U.S. Supreme Court precedent in such cases. The Arizona Democrat, a retired U.S. Navy pilot, had his attorneys argue before U.S. District Judge Richard Leon to halt the Pentagon’s punitive measures, which they claim infringe on Kelly’s First Amendment rights.
The issue stems from a video released in November, where Kelly, alongside five other Democratic lawmakers, urged military personnel to resist unlawful orders from the Trump administration. This act led to a censure from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, dated January 5, which Kelly’s legal team contests.
During the hearing, Judge Leon challenged the arguments of Justice Department attorney John Bailey, who defended the Pentagon’s stance by citing the Uniform Code of Military Justice’s application to retired service members. “Retirees are part of the armed forces,” Bailey stated, emphasizing their ongoing connection to military service.
Kelly’s attorney, Benjamin Mizer, countered this view, arguing the courts have not recognized “diminished speech rights” for military retirees. “And any other approach would be to make new law,” Mizer asserted, emphasizing the First Amendment protection of Kelly’s speech.
Judge Leon, appointed by President George W. Bush, noted the potential chilling effect the Pentagon’s actions could have on other military retirees who wish to express their views. He intends to deliver a ruling by the following Wednesday, with Kelly engaging in a handshake with government attorneys post-hearing.
The original 90-second video, shared on a social media account of Sen. Elissa Slotkin, featured representatives Jason Crow, Chris Deluzio, Maggie Goodlander, and Chrissy Houlahan. All involved are veterans of the armed forces or intelligence services.
Former President Donald Trump accused the lawmakers of sedition, a crime he claimed is “punishable by DEATH,” in a subsequent social media post. Hegseth maintained that Kelly’s censure was a procedural step that could lead to a demotion and a reduction in retirement pay, as the Pentagon investigates under a federal law allowing the recall and potential court-martial of retired service members.
According to Hegseth, Kelly is uniquely subject to this review among the lawmakers due to his formal military retirement, placing him under Pentagon jurisdiction.
