The U.S. military runs on hierarchy. Orders flow down the chain of command, and discipline keeps everything moving in sync. That structure is what allows the armed forces to act quickly and effectively, even in the toughest situations.

But the system also recognizes a hard truth: Not every order is automatically lawful. That’s why there are built‑in procedures for service members who think something might cross the line. They can raise concerns through their chain of command or seek advice from military lawyers. It’s a framework meant to protect both the mission and the rule of law.

That’s what made a recent video from six Democratic lawmakers troubling. In a social media clip titled “Don’t Give Up the Ship,” they told service members and intelligence officials that they have a duty to refuse illegal orders.

On its face, that’s true. Military law makes it clear that unlawful commands shouldn’t be followed. But critics rightfully noted the way the message was delivered skipped over the most important part: how you actually determine if an order is illegal. Without that context, the reminder sounded like an open invitation to question authority.

The military doesn’t leave questions of legality up to gut instinct. That’s where the Judge Advocate General’s Corps, or JAG Corps, comes in. These are military attorneys whose job is to advise commanders and service members on what the law allows. If someone thinks an order might be unlawful, they can flag it through their chain of command and get a JAG officer to review it. That process protects the individual from punishment if they refuse a lawful order, and it protects the military from chaos when legality isn’t clear.

And yet, President Donald Trump’s response to that video overshadowed its irresponsibility with pure recklessness. He accused the lawmakers of committing “seditious behavior, punishable by death.” Even after the White House tried to walk it back, claiming the president was not serious, that kind of rhetoric is dangerous regardless of intent. Weaponizing the language of capital punishment against elected officials is something associated with authoritarian regimes, not the United States. It drags our discourse into a dark place that could take years to recover from.

Trump also took the bait hook, line and sinker. The Democrats’ video was reckless, but by answering it with the most extreme charge imaginable, Trump foolishly amplified the very divisions the video risked stoking. He gave his opposition an assist by shifting the narrative from the Democrats’ irresponsible rhetoric to his own, even more irresponsible rhetoric. What could have easily been dismissed as a misguided message, judged by the public on its merits, became a flashpoint that now reflects negatively on the Trump administration and its backers.

Be warned — this is how a race to the bottom begins. One side issues a reckless message that undermines military discipline. The other side escalates by invoking sedition and death. Neither strengthens the rule of law, and both erode public trust in the institutions meant to safeguard it.

What should have been a sober reminder of military procedures has been supercharged by Trump into a stain on our national political discourse. If we are serious about protecting our nation and its values, we must reject this spiral of escalation. Otherwise, the America we enjoy today will dissipate before our eyes.

___

©2025 The Baltimore Sun. Visit at baltimoresun.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.