Your fact-checks will appear here
The standards of international law for humanitarian treatment in war
The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) requires service members to obey lawful orders but also recognizes a duty to disobey “patently illegal” commands — those that clearly direct the commission ...
International humanitarian law (IHL) — including the Geneva Conventions — requires states to “respect and ensure respect” for the laws of war and to hold alleged war criminals accountable; commentator...
U.S. military law requires service members to obey lawful orders and to refuse unlawful ones; the primary statutory baseline is Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (10 U.S.C. § 892), an...
The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) requires service members to obey lawful orders but recognizes a duty (and sometimes an obligation) to refuse orders that are “patently illegal,” including c...
International humanitarian law (IHL) embodied in the Geneva Conventions obliges states and commanders to respect humanitarian rules and treats certain acts—“grave breaches”—as criminal regardless of o...
U.S. service members are legally required to obey lawful orders and to refuse orders that are “manifestly” or “patently” unlawful — a narrow standard that courts and military lawyers say must be obvio...
Modern military doctrine and law require service members to obey lawful orders and to refuse clearly unlawful ones; U.S. law (UCMJ Article 92 and related guidance) and public discussion in 2025 reiter...
Alleged orders by President Donald Trump in a second term could, in theory, amount to war crimes or crimes against humanity under international law if they meet established legal elements—wrongful act...
The San Remo Manual is the leading modern restatement of the law of naval warfare and is widely treated as reflecting customary international law governing targeting and protection at sea . It imposes...
International and U.S. military law establish that servicemembers must refuse “manifestly unlawful” orders — particularly those requiring crimes such as targeting civilians, torture, or other war crim...
U.S. military law treats orders as presumptively lawful but imposes bright-line limits: an order that plainly commands criminal activity, violates the Constitution, or conflicts with the law of war is...
U.S. military law treats orders as presumptively lawful but makes a narrow exception for "patently" or "manifestly" illegal commands — those that plainly violate the Constitution, federal criminal law...
The Supreme Court in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld held that the Bush Administration’s ad hoc military commissions for Guantánamo detainees exceeded the executive’s authority because they violated the Uniform Co...
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...
Historical cases and long-standing military law have shaped a clear rule: service members must obey lawful orders and refuse unlawful ones, with criminal liability possible for both following manifest...
War crimes are the most serious violations of the laws that govern armed conflict; they require an armed conflict context and are defined by treaties (notably the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statu...
International law rejects a blanket “I was only following orders” shield for grave international crimes: Nuremberg Principle IV and post‑1945 tribunals established individual responsibility and limite...
Military law draws a clear legal line: servicemembers must obey lawful orders but must refuse orders that are “patently illegal” — typically those that direct the commission of a crime, violate the Co...
There are historically notable examples where following or refusing orders affected outcomes: Lieutenant William Calley was convicted for carrying out orders at My Lai, illustrating that obeying manif...
Rules of engagement (ROE) and international humanitarian law (IHL) shape when an order is legally binding and when subordinates may be required to refuse it: U.S. military doctrine and the DoD Law of ...