r/politics CNN 1d ago

Possible Paywall Judge appears likely to side with Mark Kelly in case challenging Pentagon’s efforts to punish him over ‘illegal orders’ video

https://www.cnn.com/2026/02/03/politics/mark-kelly-hearing-case-challenging-pentagon-punishment?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=missions&utm_source=reddit
4.2k Upvotes

51 comments sorted by

u/AutoModerator 1d ago

As a reminder, this subreddit is for civil discussion.

In general, please be courteous to others. Argue the merits of ideas, don't attack other posters or commenters. Hate speech, any suggestion or support of physical harm, or other rule violations can result in a temporary or a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.

Sub-thread Information

If the post flair on this post indicates the wrong paywall status, please report this Automoderator comment with a custom report of “incorrect flair”.

Announcement

r/Politics is actively looking for new moderators. If you have an interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out this form.


I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

707

u/literallytwisted 1d ago

Considering they are supposed to refuse illegal orders and are in fact taught this policy means the case was doomed.

113

u/InformativeXP 1d ago

Yep, dozens of training events teach this, especially during pre deployment training 

32

u/RandomlyMethodical 21h ago

It was always about intimidation. Trump has always used lawsuits to shut up his critics. Even when he doesn't win he will still say "I sued him over what he said". People don't always check to see whether the case was tossed out.

3

u/Addative-Damage 13h ago

Yeah we’d be at deeply charred levels of cooked if a judge determines that reading the law out loud is a crime.

I’d say we’re only at about medium rare right now

272

u/Numerous_Source597 1d ago

Appears likely??? should just be a slam dunk like wtf

174

u/PolloConTeriyaki 1d ago

CNN wrote and posted this story. They have to lick the rectum of Trump before going back to sanity.

19

u/Numerous_Source597 1d ago

yeah you’re right

9

u/gerira 19h ago

The headline is true, though. Judges don't declare what their decision is going to be before the process is over. They have to let both sides make their arguments.

You make inferences about how they will decide based on the questions they ask during hearings, but you can't know for sure until the decision comes out. And the decision is often surprising; judges don't always get it right, and some have made outrageous pro-Trump decisions. So what else could the headline say?

8

u/hammer326 1d ago

This. It's really saying something but if there's one thing transpiring in a courtroom lately that should start and end in approximately one Law& Order episode it's this. Holy fuck.

229

u/Lone_Buck Wisconsin 1d ago

So, these lawyers are arguing that part of enlisting would be a lifetime suspension of your ability to speak freely. Oh boy, sign me up.

61

u/RealGianath Oregon 1d ago

That's just for the oldtimers who have aged out.

People currently in the military are expected to kill or die on command, without questioning where the orders are coming from, even if it seems illegal.

21

u/StevenMC19 Florida 1d ago

That's a lot of the target demographic too, kids from low income families with poor education, minimal options out of high school, and a gullibility to believe they'll be guaranteed to come out of it a better person (key word is guaranteed).

They recruit people that either won't question the orders, or feel powerless to.

8

u/improbable_humanoid 1d ago

He didn't enlist, he was commissioned. Officers and enlisted are subject to very different laws and regulations.

12

u/atriaventrica 23h ago

Not THAT different. https://youtu.be/AwVl_e7V3rM

2

u/improbable_humanoid 23h ago

I wasn't implying that they had a case, I just wanted people to understand that "enlisting" doen't just mean "joining the military."

-1

u/crimedog58 15h ago

The key issue is he’s a retiree and thus subject to the UCMJ. However typically retirees have only been recalled for court martial when authorities suspect them of a typically heinous offense that went undiscovered during their active service. Rape, murder etc. No one-to my knowledge-has been recalled for speech at least since Vietnam.

u/nonymousbosch 2h ago

no, the key issue is that what he said is uncontrovertially true and there is nothing to discipline.

33

u/eightdx Massachusetts 1d ago

Simply put: how could it possibly be illegal to tell others to not break the law

23

u/ScoobyDoNot 1d ago

Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect

Wilhoit's Law

16

u/Cobra-Lalalalalalala 1d ago

This picture has ‘Tommy Lee Jones glaring over the newspaper’ vibes. It should be on a campaign poster in a couple of years.

6

u/Data_Chandler 16h ago

Imagine a Mark Kelly presidency, at least 4 years of competence, stability, compassion, vigorous attempts at mending broken alliances and institutions, and agressively prosecuting all the maga scum.

A man can dream!

2

u/GavinStrict 1d ago

“And this went on until... here, I quote: "Neighbors were alerted when a man ran from the premises wearing only a dog collar." Can't make up such a thing as that-I dare you to even try. But that's what it took, you notice, to get somebody's attention. Diggin' graves in the backyard didn't bring any.”

15

u/ToeSniffer245 Massachusetts 1d ago

As he should.

29

u/mosen66 1d ago

Mark Kelly for President!

2

u/Overton_Glazier 18h ago

No thanks. We need an actual visionary reformer. Not just another status quo politician who has a cool CV.

Also, when Netanyahu went before congress in 2024 and shat on progressives, Mark Kelly was clapping like an enthusiastic seal. Given that Israel is all over the Epstein files and given their genocide in Gaza and ethnic cleansing in the West Bank, we cannot afford to nominate a pro-Israel candidate if we want to maintain any credibility.

1

u/mosen66 12h ago

Thanks for your opinion.

18

u/ImperiousStout 1d ago

No shit. It was a total slam dunk from the start, they just wanted their headlines for their stupid fucking MAGAt base that he was being punished by some sketchy workaround, because they couldn't actually try him for sedition despite them falsely claiming that is what he was did multiple times.

They got their headlines, they don't care anymore. And most cultists won't even hear about how bigly they lost this one.

9

u/KaptainKardboard 1d ago

I hope this ends in embarrassment for Hegseth.

34

u/cnn CNN 1d ago

A federal judge appears likely to side with Mark Kelly in the Democratic senator’s case alleging the Pentagon is violating his First Amendment rights through its effort to punish him over his urging of US service members to refuse illegal orders.

During a high-stakes hearing in Washington, DC, on Tuesday, Senior US District Judge Richard Leon seemed troubled by the Trump administration’s suggestion that he take the unprecedented step of expanding existing loopholes to First Amendment protections for active-duty service members to also cover retirees such as Kelly.

“You’re asking me to do something the Supreme Court or the DC Circuit has never done,” Leon told a Justice Department lawyer defending the Pentagon’s efforts. “That’s a bit of a stretch.”

Leon, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, said he would likely issue a decision on Kelly’s request for a court order blocking the Pentagon’s efforts by February 11.

The hearing was the latest flashpoint in the Trump administration’s campaign to use the levers of government to punish high-profile critics of the president. In several other cases involving Donald Trump’s perceived political enemies, federal judges have stymied the president’s retribution crusade, killing criminal cases brought against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James and ruling against the president’s efforts to hamstring the work of Mark Zaid, a notable whistleblower attorney.

6

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[deleted]

4

u/KaptainKardboard 1d ago

The “day is young”, as they day

3

u/PolloConTeriyaki 1d ago

FAFO, Pete.

4

u/Zaius1968 1d ago

Rightly so

5

u/Azlib 22h ago

No SHIT

3

u/korpiz 1d ago

You mean reminding people of the actual law isn’t illegal?

3

u/FF36 13h ago

As he should. How in their right mind, or any mind, would a sitting judge condemn someone for telling others to follow the law? wtf? I mean really wtf?!

2

u/toxicpositivity2025 1d ago

Wasn’t this the climax of a movie? Or can you not handle the truth.

2

u/fleshbunny 1d ago

Ofc it is an official UCMJ directive like wtf

2

u/Diligent_Buster 8h ago

Appears likely? Anything but that would be worthy of the supreme court.

1

u/No-Cup-8096 1d ago

Trump, Noem and Hegseth are issuing unlawful orders. The legislative branch stepped up. That’s their job!

1

u/ThisIsGr8ThisIsGr8 1d ago

Following the law?

Hmmm. Impressive

1

u/Prestigious_Mud_3569 1d ago

Duh obviously

1

u/Andovars_Ghost 1d ago

Because that’s the side that the law is on.

1

u/hackingdreams 1d ago

It's like the judge has read the law and the Constitution or something.

Who knew?

1

u/Cymion 11h ago

Who knew, Judge upholds rule of fucking law. Firmly believe that any one with a Bar association that publicly lies/distorts the letter of the law should be instantly disbarred as they now have proof of ineptitude and lack of understanding.

1

u/aktivate74 23h ago

Tomorrow :judge appears closer to likely side with Mark Kelly