Judge Halts Punishment of Senator Mark Kelly Over Call to Resist Illegal Orders

A federal judge has delivered a significant blow to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s efforts to penalize Democratic Senator Mark Kelly for his advocacy urging U.S. service members to refuse unlawful orders. The ruling, issued on Thursday, deems the Pentagon chief’s actions unconstitutionally retaliatory, marking a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate surrounding free speech and military obedience.

This decision comes just two days after a grand jury in Washington, D.C., declined to pursue charges against Senator Mark Kelly and several other Democratic lawmakers. These lawmakers had previously recorded a video last year, warning of “threats to our Constitution” originating “from right here at home.” The video prominently featured repeated appeals to service members and the intelligence community to “refuse illegal orders.”

A Setback for Trump Administration Efforts

The grand jury’s decision, coupled with Judge Richard Leon’s ruling, presents substantial obstacles to attempts by allies of former President Donald Trump to leverage governmental power to punish Mark Kelly. The senator, a decorated retired Navy captain and former astronaut, faced repercussions for his participation in the aforementioned video.

Judge Leon, appointed by former President George W. Bush, issued a scathing 29-page ruling. He asserted that Hegseth’s actions were a clear violation of Senator Mark Kelly’s First Amendment rights and constituted an unacceptable form of government retaliation. The judge’s opinion underscores the importance of protecting the right to free speech, even for those who hold dissenting views.

“That Senator Kelly may be an ‘unusually staunch individual’ does not minimize his entitlement to be free from reprisal for exercising his First Amendment rights,” Leon wrote. “Senator Kelly was reprimanded for exercising his First Amendment right to speak on matters of public concern.”

Implications for Military and Political Discourse

This case raises critical questions about the balance between military discipline and the constitutional rights of both service members and elected officials. The ruling reinforces the principle that questioning or refusing demonstrably illegal orders is not insubordination, but rather a civic duty. It also highlights the potential for abuse of power when political motivations intersect with military authority.

The Department of Defense has not yet issued a statement regarding the judge’s ruling. Further developments are expected as this story continues to unfold.

For more information on First Amendment rights, please visit the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) website.

© 2026 Cable News Network. A Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All Rights Reserved. CNN Sans ™ & © 2016 Cable News Network.