A federal judge expressed skepticism about the Pentagon's effort to downgrade Sen. Mark Kelly's retirement pay and rank after he urged service members to refuse unlawful orders, saying extending active-duty speech restrictions to retirees is unprecedented; Kelly's lawyers argue a First Amendment violation and possible immunity under the Speech and Debate Clause, with a ruling anticipated by Feb. 11.
A federal judge in Washington expressed sympathy toward Senator Mark Kelly in his lawsuit challenging the Pentagon’s plan to discipline him for urging service members to refuse illegal orders, indicating he may not embrace expanding First Amendment protections to retirees. The DOJ argued the court should avoid military discipline questions, while Kelly’s team warned of a possible chilling effect on speech by current and former service members. Judge Richard Leon said a decision on Kelly’s request to block the Pentagon’s actions, which could include downgrading his retirement rank and issuing a censure, could come by February 11.
Sen. Mark Kelly filed a lawsuit against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and related Defense Department officials, arguing that actions taken in response to his and fellow lawmakers’ criticisms violated his First Amendment rights, the Speech and Debate Clause, and several related statutes (including rules on retired officers’ ranks and the Administrative Procedure Act). The suit follows Hegseth’s January censure of Kelly after a veterans’ video urging military personnel to refuse illegal orders, and frames the dispute as part of broader tensions over congressional oversight and political influence within the military. Kelly, a retired Navy officer and astronaut, defends his speech as Constitutionally protected and warns that allowing such executive actions could undermine a coequal Congress. The piece also references ancillary reports on war-law issues, such as perfidy in a 2025 Venezuelan-boat attack, to illustrate ongoing civil-military tensions.