Clash between Mark Kelly, Pete Hegseth over retired veterans’ free speech rights advances
U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly said his lawsuit against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth could decide the future of First Amendment rights for retired veterans.
Watch: The truth about Arizona's water shortage and your bills | 11 mins
U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly said his lawsuit against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth could decide the future of First Amendment rights for all retired veterans.
“Today, this administration argued in federal court that not only do I not have the same freedom of speech rights as other Americans, but that the millions of other retired veterans across the country don’t either,” Kelly said in a speech after a hearing on Thursday.
His legal battles with President Donald Trump’s administration have been ongoing for months, but Thursday’s hearing was notable because the Trump administration argued in court that retired veterans do not have the same First Amendment protections as other Americans.
The dispute stems from a 90-second video in which Kelly and other congressional Democrats said military members should not follow illegal orders.
The video sparked a feud after President Donald Trump criticized Kelly online, and Hegseth moved to strip him of his military honors. In response to Hegseth’s actions, Kelly sued him in January.
“What I said was a true and accurate statement of the law. It’s literally written into the DOD’s law of war manual,” Kelly said. “In response, the president said I should be prosecuted and hanged. Then he tried to throw me in jail.”
Why the Trump admin’s argument against Mark Kelly matters
During oral arguments Thursday before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Justice Department lawyer John Bailey argued that Kelly’s remarks were not protected speech.
“If a retired officer wants none of the obligations that come with membership in the military, they must give up the benefits,” Bailey told the judges.
The crux of the Trump administration’s argument is that Kelly counseled service members to disobey lawful orders — and that the government is justified in treating his remarks as unprotected speech.
If the court accepts that stance, it could give the Trump administration broad authority to punish retired service members for saying things it disagrees with, Kelly said.
“The people who have given the most in service to this country wouldn’t be free to say what they believe. It’s absurd and it’s outrageous,” Kelly said. “One of our most fundamental rights is the right to speak out about the government. It’s the right that guarantees all others — and it’s how we hold our government accountable.”
Mark Kelly condemns President Donald Trump over Iran War
Being outspoken against power is extremely important in the wake of the war in Iran, he added.
Donald Trump is two months into a war with Iran that he started without a strategic goal. Thirteen Americans have died. The same Iranian regime is in charge and their enriched uranium is still in their possession. The Strait of Hormuz is now closed and Americans are suffering with skyrocketing gas prices. And without any explanation from this president of what this war is trying to achieve. Who better to speak out and share their perspective than the people who served?
– U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly
As veterans stood behind his podium, Kelly urged his audience not to give up the ship.
“It was a day in court not just for me, but for millions of retired veterans and our First Amendment rights,” he said. “I will not back down from this fight.”
Mark Kelly hopes to secure another win against Pete Hegseth in court
On Feb. 12, a federal judge blocked the Defense Department from censuring Kelly and demoting him from his retired rank of Navy captain over the video.
The judge ruled that the Pentagon’s effort to discipline Kelly violated his First Amendment right to free speech. Hegseth appealed that ruling.
Federal prosecutors had previously failed to persuade a grand jury to indict the six Democratic lawmakers involved in the video.
Related
How a 90-second video put Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona at center of a national controversy
Sen. Mark Kelly sues Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth in response to demotion threat
Arizona US Sen. Mark Kelly censured, could be demoted over 'illegal orders' video
Mesa industrial property sells for $5.25 million
Sen. Mark Kelly believes Trump would hit ‘reset button’ on Iran war if he could, offers solution
3 dead, 1 injured following Gilbert stabbing and officer-involved shooting
Comments
15 Comments
Hegseth the Blowhard is bringing a can opener to a gunfight.
What a cretin.
Hey MAGAloons, if it talks like a fascist, acts like a fascist and implements fascist policy then guess what, it's a fascist! Why you fascists can't get that through your thick skulls the world may never know!
Investigations into the Abu Ghraib abuses found that responsibility flowed through multiple layers of command. Investigators concluded that an atmosphere encouraging “softening up” detainees, unclear interrogation policies, poor oversight, and pressure from intelligence personnel contributed to the abuse.
Personnel Involved:
Janis Karpinski, Brigadier General, Commander, 800th Military Police Brigade.
Oversaw military police units running Abu Ghraib, including subordinate battalion and company commanders.
Penalty: Relieved of command, reprimanded, demoted.
Thomas Pappas, Colonel, Commander, 205th Military Intelligence Brigade.
Supervised military intelligence operations and interrogation policy at Abu Ghraib. Intelligence personnel encouraged MPs to “set conditions” for interrogations.
Penalty: Reprimand, fine, relieved of command.
Steven L. Jordan, Lieutenant Colonel, Director, Joint Interrogation and Debriefing Center.
Coordinated interrogation operations and interacted with MP personnel.
Penalty: Formal reprimand after acquittal on major charges.
Jerry Phillabaum, Lieutenant Colonel, Commander, 320th Military Police Battalion.
Battalion-level oversight of MP guards at Abu Ghraib.
Penalty: Reprimanded and relieved of command.
Donald Reese, Captain, Commander, 372nd Military Police Company.
Direct commander of many enlisted MPs involved in the abuse.
Reprimanded and relieved of command.
Ivan Frederick, Staff Sergeant, Night-shift supervisor / MP guard.
Supervised enlisted guards on the night shift.
Penalty: 8 years prison, dishonorable discharge.
Javal Davis, Sergeant, MP guard.
Reported to shift supervisors including Staff Sgt. Frederick and MP command structure.
Penalty: 6 months prison, reduction in rank.
Santos Cardona, Sergeant, Military working dog handler.
Worked with military intelligence personnel during interrogations.
Penalty: 90 days hard labor, reduction in rank.
Michael J. Smith, Sergeant, Military working dog handler.
Worked under MP and interrogation command structures.
Penalty: 6 months prison, bad-conduct discharge.
Charles A. Graner Jr., Specialist, MP guard.
Reported through Staff Sgt. Frederick and company command. Investigators described Graner as a principal instigator rather than someone merely following orders.
Penalty: 10 years prison, dishonorable discharge.
Sabrina Harman, Specialist, MP guard.
Worked under night-shift supervisors and MP command.
Penalty: 6 months prison, bad-conduct discharge.
Jeremy Sivits, Specialist, MP guard.
Reported through MP chain of command and shift supervisors.
Penalty: 1 year prison, dishonorable discharge.
Megan Ambuhl, Specialist, MP guard.
Worked under MP supervisory chain.
Penalty: Reduction in rank and pay.
Lynndie England, Private First Class, MP guard.
Reported to shift supervisors including Staff Sgt. Frederick; associated closely with Charles Graner.
Penalty: 3 years prison, dishonorable discharge.
Still so sure of yourself, Fred?