Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What procedures should a service member follow to lawfully refuse an order they suspect is unlawful?
Executive summary
Service members legally must follow lawful orders and must refuse manifestly unlawful orders such as those that clearly violate the U.S. Constitution, criminal law, or the law of war (Article 92, UCMJ referenced across reporting) [1] [2]. Public discussion after a Nov. 18, 2025 video by six Democratic lawmakers emphasized that troops “can and must refuse illegal orders,” but commentators warn the legal duty to disobey is narrow, fact-specific, and fraught with career and criminal risk if handled improperly [1] [3].
1. Why the question matters now: politicized reminders and legal reality
A high-profile video from six Democratic lawmakers telling service members to “refuse illegal orders” reignited debate about how troops should respond to orders they suspect are unlawful; news outlets note the message is technically correct but warned it can create confusion when delivered outside the chain of command [1] [4] [3].
2. The legal baseline: obey lawful orders, disobey unlawful ones
Multiple reports explain the Uniform Code of Military Justice creates a default duty of obedience but also requires disobedience of unlawful orders—especially “manifestly unlawful” commands that direct crimes or clear violations of constitutional or international law [2] [5] [6].
3. What counts as an unlawful order — the narrow category
Sources define unlawful orders as those that “clearly violate” the Constitution, U.S. law, international human rights standards, or the Geneva Conventions; courts and manuals treat only orders that a “person of ordinary sense and understanding” would know to be unlawful as manifestly illegal [6] [5] [7].
4. Practical steps a service member should follow (based on reporting and legal framing)
Available reporting emphasizes caution: (a) assess whether the order is clearly criminal or a blatant violation of law or the Constitution; (b) seek legal advice within the chain of command — for example, consult a judge advocate or other legal authority if feasible; (c) use internal reporting channels and document concerns; and (d) refuse only when the unlawfulness is manifest, because executing an unlawful order can expose you to prosecution while wrongful refusal can trigger disciplinary action [2] [5] [8]. Note: specific procedural checklists are not enumerated in these articles; available sources do not list a single step‑by‑step statutory process.
5. Risks and tradeoffs emphasized by analysts and service-members
Reporting stresses dual risks: following an unlawful order can lead to criminal liability (including under international law), but disobeying orders can damage one’s career or lead to prosecution if the unlawful nature is not clear. Commentators say manifestly unlawful orders are relatively rare and legally fraught to litigate after the fact [5] [6] [7].
6. Chain-of-command and political context — who should give this advice
Multiple outlets caution that public exhortations from lawmakers to the troops can unintentionally undermine military discipline and blur legal advice with political messaging; while some observers praised reminding troops of their oath to the Constitution, others warned civilians outside the chain of command should be careful about instructing service members on how to act [1] [4] [9].
7. How service members report or seek review of suspect orders
Coverage points to internal legal resources as the appropriate place to raise concerns (judge advocates, inspectors general, or military legal offices) rather than public statements, and notes that prior reporting on contested operations prompted legal review within commands — illustrating that internal review mechanisms are the functional route for challenging orders [2] [6]. Specific agency forms or step-by-step channels were not detailed in these articles; available sources do not provide a comprehensive procedural form.
8. Competing perspectives and what to watch for
Advocates say reminding troops of a duty to refuse unlawful orders reinforces constitutional safeguards; critics—often political opponents and some military voices—say such reminders should be precise and come through the chain of command to avoid confusion and politicization [1] [4] [9]. Watch for official DoD or service‑specific legal guidance, which would carry practical weight beyond commentary [1].
9. Bottom line for a service member confronting a suspect order
Treat the matter seriously: evaluate whether the order is manifestly unlawful; if possible, consult available judge advocates or legal channels and document your concerns; understand that both following and disobeying carry legal risks unless guidance from military legal authorities clarifies the order’s lawfulness [2] [5] [6]. Available sources do not provide a single mandatory script for refusal—procedures depend on context and service regulations.