Six Democratic lawmakers who served in the military or intelligence agencies confirmed Wednesday they are under investigation by the Trump administration’s Justice Department after releasing a video urging service members to resist “illegal orders.”
At a Glance
- Six veteran Democratic lawmakers face DOJ investigation after releasing a 90-second video to troops
- Sen. Elissa Slotkin revealed prosecutors contacted her last week for an interview
- Pentagon separately moved to demote Sen. Mark Kelly from retired captain rank
- President Trump labeled the video “seditious” and punishable by death
Why it matters: The investigation represents an unprecedented use of federal law enforcement against sitting members of Congress for speech protected by the First Amendment.
The FBI first contacted the lawmakers late last year after their video’s release. The investigation escalated when the U.S. attorney’s office for the District of Columbia reached out to schedule interviews, according to statements from the members.
Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, a former CIA analyst, disclosed the prosecutor contact in an interview with The New York Times. She posted a video to her X account detailing how U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s office contacted her.
“This is the president’s playbook. Truth doesn’t matter. Facts don’t matter. And anyone who disagrees with him becomes an enemy,” Slotkin said. “And he then weaponizes the federal government against them. It’s legal intimidation and physical intimidation meant to get you to shut up.”
Pirro’s office declined to confirm or deny the investigation’s existence.
Democratic Response
Four House Democrats joined Slotkin in confirming federal prosecutor contact:
- Jason Crow of Colorado
- Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania
- Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire
“Like my colleagues, I was contacted by federal prosecutors who are investigating me for making a video reminding servicemembers not to follow illegal orders,” Houlahan said in a statement to News Of Philadelphia.
She continued: “The six of us are being targeted not because we said something untrue, but because we said something President Trump and Secretary Hegseth didn’t want anyone to hear.”
The Pennsylvania representative noted her office continues receiving threats following the video’s release. She emphasized the investigation’s timing coincides with reports of potential military action against Iran.
“This investigation is ridiculous on any day but especially so on a day the President is considering launching airstrikes against Iran in retaliation for their crack down on free speech,” Houlahan said. “We will not be silenced.”
Rep. Jason Crow issued a defiant statement: “The Trump administration picked the wrong people.”
Rep. Maggie Goodlander called the investigation “downright dangerous” and said federal targeting for performing congressional duties threatens democracy.
“These threats will not deter, distract, intimidate, or silence me,” Goodlander said.
The Video That Sparked Investigation
The 90-second video features the six lawmakers addressing military service members directly. They urge troops to follow established military protocols by refusing commands that violate existing laws.
The lawmakers stated the administration “is pitting our uniformed military against American citizens” and called on service members to “stand up for our laws.”
President Trump responded on social media, calling the video “seditious” and claiming sedition is “punishable by death.”
Legal experts have questioned what specific laws the video could violate, as the content focuses on established military protocol regarding lawful versus unlawful orders.
House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries defended the members Wednesday, stating “these members of Congress did not violate the law” and promising Democrats “stand firmly behind them.”
Pentagon Targets Sen. Mark Kelly
The Defense Department launched a separate investigation into Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona, a former Navy pilot. Pentagon officials cited federal law allowing retired service members’ recall to active duty for potential court-martial or punishment.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has censured Kelly for his video participation and seeks to retroactively demote him from retired rank of captain.
Kelly filed a lawsuit against Hegseth to block the proceedings, arguing they represent unconstitutional retaliation against protected speech.
“The First Amendment forbids the government and its officials from punishing disfavored expression or retaliating against protected speech,” Kelly’s lawsuit states.
The legal action highlights tensions between military discipline and elected officials’ First Amendment rights when addressing service members on matters of public concern.
Investigation Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Late 2024 | 90-second video released by six Democratic lawmakers |
| Late 2024 | FBI contacts lawmakers for interviews |
| January 2025 | U.S. Attorney’s Office contacts Slotkin for interview |
| January 22, 2025 | All six lawmakers confirm DOJ investigation |
The investigation marks an escalation in the Trump administration’s approach to critics within Congress, particularly those with military backgrounds who challenge administration policies affecting the armed forces.
The six lawmakers represent a combined decades of military and intelligence service:
- Elissa Slotkin: Former CIA analyst
- Jason Crow: Army Ranger veteran
- Chrissy Houlahan: Former Air Force officer
- Maggie Goodlander: Navy veteran
- Mark Kelly: Navy pilot and NASA astronaut
- [Fourth House member]: Military/intelligence background
Their collective experience forms the basis of their video message to service members about legal obligations under military code and constitutional requirements.
Constitutional Questions
The investigation raises fundamental questions about First Amendment protections for elected officials, particularly when addressing military personnel on matters of public policy and legal obligations.
Legal scholars note the Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause provides broad protections for lawmakers performing official duties, though its application to communications with military personnel remains less tested in courts.
The lawmakers argue their video constitutes protected political speech and falls within their congressional oversight responsibilities of military operations and executive branch actions.
The Justice Department’s pursuit of interviews suggests prosecutors believe potential criminal conduct occurred, though no specific statutes or charges have been publicly identified.
The investigation continues as the administration considers military options regarding Iran and faces ongoing scrutiny over its treatment of military personnel and veterans in policy decisions.
