Posted on Dec 9, 2020
Would you obey an illegal or unconstitutional order?
48.1K
1.92K
627
116
112
4
What are your professional and personal views on the right and the duty of active and retired military to disobey illegal or unconstitutional orders? (Ref. UCMJ, Articles 90, 91, 92; and the Fourth Geneva Convention.)
For instance, in the event a sitting U.S. President loses an election in the electoral college, and as a means to stay in office declares martial law or invokes the 1807 Insurrection Act, should you obey such an order? Would you individually be willing to comply?
Let's have a frank and friendly discussion on this vital topic....
e.g., https://www.witf.org/2020/06/02/president-trump-says-hell-deploy-military-to-states-if-they-dont-stop-violent-protests/
For instance, in the event a sitting U.S. President loses an election in the electoral college, and as a means to stay in office declares martial law or invokes the 1807 Insurrection Act, should you obey such an order? Would you individually be willing to comply?
Let's have a frank and friendly discussion on this vital topic....
e.g., https://www.witf.org/2020/06/02/president-trump-says-hell-deploy-military-to-states-if-they-dont-stop-violent-protests/
UCMJ
Martial Law
Election 2020
Civil Affairs
Orders
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 210
2
2
0
An illegal and unconstitutional law is an immoral one. Therefore under the Authority of Almighty God we are no longer bound to obey it! For when all is said and done it will be you and I individually in who will stand before our Heavenly Father in judgement for obeying mans immorality and wickedness.
(2)
(0)
Suspended Profile
There is also Case Law that holds that EVERY LAW that threatens or negates the Constitution is Null and Void because it is an ILLEGAL law.
Cpl Brian Escobar
Nice to know..but in reality and with all due respect: I don't need man's case law to validate my God Given Natural Rights. There were plenty of English case laws that protected the rights of our founding fathers from the crown's overt abuses and aggression and yet the crown and parliament persisted in violating said 'established' rights. That is until the founding fathers shot and killed enough of their oppressors into submitting to their demands of separation and independence; and then codified those Natural Rights into our Bill of Rights...
(0)
(0)
Cpl Brian Escobar
Whether or not you believe my statement about The Creator is "absurd" is irrelevant...I still have a NATURAL RIGHT nay! a DUTY to oppose unconstitutional and immoral laws...by the way so do you...
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
For instance, a sitting US President orders that racism, its actual practice, be taught in the Armed Forces. It's to be taught as right, correct, and to be implemented immediately.
(2)
(0)
LCpl Glenn Kellar
Yes, sir, that is happening as we speak. It happened to us in the mid-70's until the Commandant became aware. Only white guys had to attend racial diversity classes. When the black guys had to attend the inverse classes, it became a really bad idea
(1)
(0)
MSgt Gilbert Jones
I can't speak for other branches of the services but in the AF everyone had to attend EEO classes. Don't be another poor mistreated white guy!
(0)
(0)
Lt Col Timothy Cassidy-Curtis
MSgt Gilbert Jones - Actually, EEO wasn't too bad. When I reported to Vandenberg AFB one of the EEO NCO's said that there are a number of things that I could judge him about; this included his demeanor, his attitude, his performance, as you can see, all things that he can control. Then he noted a few things that he cannot control. His message was this: Please do not judge me by things I cannot control. I think that was one of the best pieces of advice I ever got.
(0)
(0)
MSgt Gilbert Jones
He was a good EEO NCO to state that. The problem I saw with our EEO program back in the 70s was whites thought the problem was just for blacks, and that wasn't true. There were both white and blacks troops that played the system, and then there were those who the program really helped. As a supervisor and First Sergeant, I found this to be true.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
The Veteran or Service member who posted this ALREADY KNOWS THE ANSWER! Don't throw grenades in packed audiences.
(2)
(0)
Sgt Greg Nowark
I answered YES to the biased-poll question as asked, NOT confusing myself with the "still beat your wife?" framework.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
You can't have a frank and friendly discussion on a question that lacks or alters fact. I am not sure the modern Soldier has any Idea what it means to disobey a lawful order or unconstitutional Order and it is quit obvious that the author is simply ignorant of how the military judicial system works.
Let me make it clear that it is any Soldiers Responsibility to Refuse an Illegal or Unconstitutional order. Which makes your question invalid. Then the rant to President Trump Makes it even worse. Soldiers are trained to use all information, and Circumstances to make decision. Then if still not sure use the COC to question such orders. Quit stirring the Shit pile to make your point.
Let me make it clear that it is any Soldiers Responsibility to Refuse an Illegal or Unconstitutional order. Which makes your question invalid. Then the rant to President Trump Makes it even worse. Soldiers are trained to use all information, and Circumstances to make decision. Then if still not sure use the COC to question such orders. Quit stirring the Shit pile to make your point.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Disobey 101%. I had a few details around Lt. Calley's quarters. For those of you with memory that is.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Yes & no. If I agreed with an obvious need, I would, & take my lumps like a responsible man. If I saw no immediate evidence or need / urgency, then yes, I would refuse the order, & briefly explain why, again "facing the music." It's REALLY all about taking responsibility. "You can do anything you want to, as long as you're willing to pay the price."
(1)
(0)
SGT Mary G.
CPL Joseph Elinger I would make sure I knew precise details about what was illegal while I considered the price those would be paying who were insisting on an illegal order.
I say this knowing that illegal retribution would likely be brutal, and taking into consideration how protected, and by whom, those giving the order are.
End results: hypocrisy and crimes exposed - whistle blower treated like a criminal.
Cynical? Some, more like low expectations, mostly from 50 years of experience in that respect, worse in civilian life then military life - though not acceptable in either demographic.
I say this knowing that illegal retribution would likely be brutal, and taking into consideration how protected, and by whom, those giving the order are.
End results: hypocrisy and crimes exposed - whistle blower treated like a criminal.
Cynical? Some, more like low expectations, mostly from 50 years of experience in that respect, worse in civilian life then military life - though not acceptable in either demographic.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
No under any circumstances by definition - it's not legal or constitutional.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google