Executive Summary
- The FBI is seeking interviews with six Democratic lawmakers regarding a video on “illegal orders.”
- President Trump accused the lawmakers of “seditious behavior” prior to the investigation.
- The Defense Department is separately reviewing Senator Mark Kelly under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
- Lawmakers have denounced the probes as political intimidation and harassment.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation is actively working to schedule interviews with six Democratic lawmakers who appeared in a video urging military and intelligence personnel to refuse illegal orders, according to sources familiar with the matter.
The inquiry follows public accusations by President Donald Trump, who characterized the lawmakers’ actions as “seditious behavior.” The group includes four members of the House of Representatives—Jason Crow (Colo.), Maggie Goodlander (N.H.), Chris Deluzio (Pa.), and Chrissy Houlahan (Pa.)—and two Senators, Mark Kelly (Ariz.) and Elissa Slotkin (Mich.). All six individuals previously served in military or intelligence roles.
In a joint statement, the four House members confirmed they had been contacted by House and Senate sergeants-at-arms regarding the FBI’s request. The lawmakers accused the administration of “using the FBI as a tool to intimidate and harass Members of Congress.”
Concurrently, the Department of Defense has initiated a specific review concerning Senator Mark Kelly, a retired Navy captain. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a memo directing the Secretary of the Navy to report on the outcome of a review by December 10. The Pentagon asserts that Senator Kelly remains subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) as a retired service member.
Constitutional and Legal Outlook
This development marks a significant escalation in the friction between the executive and legislative branches regarding the oversight of military conduct. The investigation raises complex legal questions regarding the protections afforded to sitting members of Congress under the Speech or Debate Clause, as well as the jurisdiction of the UCMJ over retired military officers now serving in elected federal office. Legal experts note that defining political speech as sedition involves a high evidentiary threshold. It is important to note that all individuals named in these inquiries are presumed innocent of any wrongdoing until proven guilty in a court of law.
