The Democrats’ Civil–Military Line-Jump That No Serious Country Should Tolerate
Democrats spent four years insisting that even questioning an election was “a threat to democracy.”
Now, in a stunning act of political amnesia, a group of Democratic lawmakers has released a public video telling U.S. troops and intelligence personnel to refuse what they call “illegal orders” from President Trump — with no court ruling, no statutory framework, and no constitutional authority backing their interpretation.
It is the clearest example in modern memory of elected officials encouraging the military to substitute political judgment for lawful command hierarchy.
The New York Post captured the danger bluntly:
“This is a breathtaking attack on the chain of command… one that could tear the nation apart.”— NY Post, Nov. 19, 2025
The lawmakers claim they’re defending “the rule of law.”
Instead, they’re eroding the very structure that keeps the military subordinate to civilian government.
The Video That Should Never Have Existed
The video — featuring several House Democrats — urges troops, intelligence officers, and federal employees to defy unspecified “illegal” commands.
Not “unconstitutional.”
Not “judicially blocked.”
Not “contrary to a statutory directive.”
Just “illegal”, defined solely by the political worldview of the speaker.
Fox News highlighted just how reckless that posture is:
“Dangerous war games: Telling servicemembers to resist Trump invites pure chaos.”
Former military lawyers quoted in follow-up reporting warned the message is not just irresponsible — it’s professionally suicidal:
“Troops risk court-martial if they follow Democrats’ ‘illegal orders’ advice.” -Fox News, analysis
This isn’t a partisan interpretation.
It’s the literal text of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
The Washington Post Raises the Alarm: This Isn’t How Unlawful Orders Work
Even the Washington Post, hardly a MAGA bellwether, felt compelled to clarify how the military actually interprets unlawful orders.
Their breakdown notes that the bar for disobeying an order is extremely high:
- The order must be manifestly unlawful.
- The unlawfulness must be clear to a reasonable soldier.
- The service member must be able to articulate the legal impropriety.
The Post’s analysis makes crystal clear why politically defined “illegal orders” are a recipe for national instability:
“The military does not decide legality based on political disagreement.”
Yet that is exactly the framework these Democratic lawmakers just encouraged.
The Real Consequence: Eroding Civil–Military Discipline
Encouraging servicemembers to substitute political narratives for lawful command hierarchy strikes at the core of American stability.
The Fox/Yahoo joint analysis put it in stark terms:
“Servicemembers who refuse lawful orders based on political messaging risk severe criminal penalties.”
And here’s the institutional point:
No republic survives elected officials asking military personnel to pick and choose which civilian commands they deem legitimate.
There are nations where armies decide their own political mandate.
They are not stable democracies.
They do not have peaceful transitions.
They do not have functioning constitutions.
The U.S. military’s apolitical chain of command is the firewall.
This video asks troops to poke holes in it.
Democrats Have Crossed the Red Line They Once Claimed to Defend
The same political class that said a mean tweet was a constitutional crisis is now:
- reinterpreting military doctrine on YouTube,
- telling servicemembers to internally adjudicate legality,
- and normalizing the concept of selective obedience based on political persuasion.
The New York Post called it correctly:
“Dems urging troops to ‘disobey’ are playing a dangerous game.”
At a minimum, this is reckless political opportunism.
At worst, it is a direct violation of the norms that prevent the United States from devolving into military-political factionalism.
V. This Is Not Civil Disobedience — It’s Civil–Military Breakdown
Civil disobedience applies to private citizens.
Federal employees and uniformed servicemembers are bound by:
- statutory law
- oath of office
- chain of command
- judicial review
- civilian oversight
In short:
You cannot crowdsource “illegal order” determinations to partisans on social media.
If every soldier followed the advice in that video, the result wouldn’t be democratic accountability — it would be operational paralysis.
That’s why serious commentators across the spectrum — including those hostile to the Trump administration — are condemning this messaging as dangerous, destabilizing, and institutionally reckless.
Bottom Line
Whatever one thinks of Donald Trump or his policies, there is a bright red line between:
- lawful dissent,
- legislative oversight,
- judicial review,
and telling the military to ignore its commander-in-chief based on partisan rhetoric.
Crossing that line isn’t principled.
It’s not courageous.
It’s not pro-democracy.
It’s how countries break.
Citations
- New York Post – “Dems urging troops to ‘disobey’ are playing a dangerous game” (Nov 19, 2025)
- Fox News – “Dangerous war games: Telling servicemembers to resist Trump invites pure chaos” (Nov 2025)
- Fox News – “Troops risk court-martial if they follow Democrats’ ‘illegal orders’ advice, former military lawyers warn” (Nov 2025)
- Yahoo News – Syndicated: “Troops risk court-martial…” (Nov 2025)
- Washington Post – “Does the military have to follow unlawful orders?” (Nov 2025)