On January 5, 2026, a political and military firestorm erupted as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced the formal censure and impending demotion of Arizona Senator Mark Kelly, a retired Navy captain and celebrated astronaut. The move, described as rare and extraordinary by observers, follows Kelly’s participation in a November 2025 video that urged U.S. military personnel to refuse unlawful orders—a message Hegseth and former President Donald Trump have labeled as seditious, while Kelly and his fellow lawmakers insist it was a constitutional reminder.
The Pentagon’s action, as reported by ABC News and other outlets, will reduce Kelly’s retired rank and pension, a process set to unfold over the next 45 days. The censure letter, which Kelly’s office provided to NBC News, accuses the senator of counseling members of the Armed Forces to refuse lawful orders, undermining the chain of command, and bringing discredit upon the military. “When viewed in totality, your pattern of conduct demonstrates specific intent to counsel servicemembers to refuse lawful orders. This pattern demonstrates that you were not providing abstract legal education about the duty to refuse patently illegal orders. You were specifically counseling servicemembers to refuse particular operations that you have characterized as illegal,” the letter states. Hegseth’s letter further warned, “Your status as a sitting United States Senator does not exempt you from accountability for conduct that undermines good order and discipline in our Armed Forces.”
The controversy stems from a 90-second video released in late November 2025, in which Kelly and five other Democratic lawmakers—all with military or intelligence backgrounds—addressed service members directly. The video, released amid heightened tensions over the Trump administration’s domestic deployment of the National Guard, called on troops to “uphold the Constitution and defy what they characterized as illegal commands.” According to The Guardian, the lawmakers’ message was clear: U.S. military personnel have a duty to refuse unlawful orders, echoing long-standing military law and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
President Donald Trump responded furiously, calling the video “seditious behavior” and suggesting the lawmakers involved should be jailed. Days after the video’s release, Trump even accused them of sedition “punishable by DEATH” in a social media post, according to The Guardian. The Pentagon initiated a thorough review, and by early January, Hegseth had moved to censure and demote Kelly, while warning that further violations could lead to more severe consequences.
In his censure letter, Hegseth accused Kelly of “directly attacking the legitimacy of military leadership and the lawfulness of their orders,” stating that Kelly’s conduct “seriously compromises your standing as an officer and brings dishonor to the officer corps.” The secretary emphasized that as a retired Navy captain still receiving a pension, Kelly remains “accountable to military justice.” Hegseth cited violations of Articles 133 and 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which pertain to conduct unbecoming an officer and actions prejudicial to good order and discipline.
Kelly’s response was swift, sharp, and personal. In a statement released on January 5 and shared across multiple media outlets, Kelly defended his record and decried the Pentagon’s actions as politically motivated intimidation. “Over twenty-five years in the U.S. Navy, thirty-nine combat missions, and four missions to space, I risked my life for this country and to defend our Constitution—including the First Amendment rights of every American to speak out. I never expected that the President of the United States and the Secretary of Defense would attack me for doing exactly that,” Kelly said. He continued, “My rank and retirement are things that I earned through my service and sacrifice for this country. I got shot at. I missed holidays and birthdays. I commanded a space shuttle mission while my wife Gabby recovered from a gunshot wound to the head—all while proudly wearing the American flag on my shoulder.”
Kelly’s outrage was palpable as he accused Hegseth and Trump of sending a chilling message to all retired servicemembers. “Pete Hegseth wants to send the message to every single retired servicemember that if they say something he or Donald Trump doesn’t like, they will come after them the same way. It’s outrageous and it is wrong. There is nothing more un-American than that. If Pete Hegseth, the most unqualified Secretary of Defense in our country’s history, thinks he can intimidate me with a censure or threats to demote me or prosecute me, he still doesn’t get it. I will fight this with everything I’ve got—not for myself, but to send a message back that Pete Hegseth and Donald Trump don’t get to decide what Americans in this country get to say about their government.”
The Pentagon’s move has sparked heated debate about the boundaries of free speech, military discipline, and the unique status of retired officers who also serve in public office. Military law does require troops to refuse unlawful orders, and Kelly’s defenders argue that the video merely reminded service members of their constitutional obligations. Indeed, as The Guardian noted, federal judges have at times ruled that Trump’s military deployments in U.S. cities violated the Posse Comitatus Act, suggesting that the orders Kelly warned about might themselves have been illegal.
Yet, the Pentagon’s stance is that Kelly’s statements went beyond abstract legal education and amounted to direct counseling to refuse orders, thereby undermining the chain of command. The censure letter, which will become part of Kelly’s permanent military file, states that his conduct “brings dishonor to the officer corps” and warns that further actions could be forthcoming if Kelly repeats such conduct.
Notably, while Kelly was joined in the video by other Democratic lawmakers with military or intelligence backgrounds—including Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan and Representatives Jason Crow, Maggie Goodlander, Chris Deluzio, and Chrissy Houlahan—no action has been taken against them as of yet. The Pentagon’s focus has remained squarely on Kelly, perhaps owing to his high profile as both a senator and a decorated astronaut.
For now, Kelly has 30 days to submit a formal response to the censure, and the Navy secretary has been directed to complete the retirement grade review within 45 days. The outcome could see Kelly lose rank and a substantial portion of his pension, a sanction rarely imposed on a sitting member of Congress.
This episode highlights the fraught intersection of military law, political speech, and the enduring tensions between civilian oversight and military discipline. As the process unfolds, both supporters and critics of Kelly’s actions are watching closely, aware that the implications reach far beyond one senator’s pension—they touch on the very nature of constitutional duty, dissent, and the limits of power in American democracy.
