Sen. Kelly sues Pete Hegseth, warns Trump administration is weaponizing military discipline to punish dissent

U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) sued Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth Monday, in an effort to prevent the Trump administration from moving to reduce his retired Navy rank and pension — actions Kelly says were taken to punish him for criticizing the administration and warning service members to refuse unlawful orders.

The lawsuit challenges a Jan. 5 Letter of Censure issued by Hegseth, and the Defense Department’s decision to reopen Kelly’s retirement grade more than a decade after he left active duty in 2011. Kelly argues the measures are unconstitutional retaliation against a sitting member of Congress and part of a broader effort by President Donald Trump to weaponize the military against political opponents.

Trump’s retaliation campaign traces back to November, when Kelly and five other Democratic lawmakers released a video reminding service members that they are legally required to refuse unlawful orders — a principle rooted in military law and taught throughout the armed forces. 

Instead of disputing the law, the Trump administration accused the lawmakers of treason and launched disciplinary proceedings against Kelly.

“Senator Kelly and five other Members of Congress released a video reiterating servicemembers’ longstanding and widely accepted legal obligation to disregard unlawful orders, President Trump and Secretary Hegseth publicly branded his statements as ‘sedition’ and ‘treason,’ and warned that there would be consequences,” the complaint states. “Despite the accuracy of the video and the statements of its participants, the Administration immediately responded with threats of death, prosecution, imprisonment, and violence.”

Last week, Hegseth formally censured Kelly, accusing him of “conduct unbecoming an officer,” and directed the Navy to reconsider the rank at which Kelly retired — a move that could sharply cut his military pension. 

Kelly argued the decision was punitive from the outset and that the administration only afterward staged a process to justify it.

“The Constitution does not permit the government to announce the verdict in advance and then subject Senator Kelly or anyone else to a nominal process designed only to fulfill it,” the complaint adds. “The Secretary himself has echoed those accusations, announced an investigation, and then issued a Letter of Censure that — not tentatively, but conclusively — determined that Senator Kelly’s speech met the very criteria that the Department must consider when reducing retirement grade. The outcome of any subsequent ‘review’ of Senator Kelly’s grade — even assuming it could lawfully proceed — is foreordained.”

Kelly’s lawsuit frames the case as a direct assault on democratic checks and balances. By using military authority against a sitting senator for public criticism and oversight, the Executive Branch, he argues, is attempting to subordinate Congress itself.

“Allowing that unprecedented step here would invert the constitutional structure by subordinating the Legislative Branch to executive discipline and chilling congressional oversight of the armed forces,” the complaint continued. “Defendants’ actions impermissibly usurp Congress’s authority to punish its own members and directly burden Congress’s ability to investigate, oversee, and criticize the Executive’s use of the armed forces.”

The complaint further warns that the campaign against Kelly is meant to reach far beyond one senator — signaling that veterans, lawmakers and public servants who challenge Trump’s military actions do so at their own peril.

“What the President is doing is sending a very chilling message across our entire nation, not only in the military, but the civilian workforce,” Kelly said, as quoted in the filing. “Why would anyone speak out if they can go and prosecute a U.S. senator?”

Kelly is asking the court to immediately halt the censure and the retirement-rank proceedings, arguing the harm to democratic norms cannot be undone later.

The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon, a conservative federal judge who has previously ruled that the Constitution bars the military from prosecuting retired service members for post-retirement conduct.

This story has been updated.