President Donald Trump’s drive to punish his political rivals just suffered two setbacks but then instantly surged forward in a dramatic and alarming way.
Two high profile criminal cases collapsed this week. Judges dismissed charges against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, after ruling that Trump’s specially chosen prosecutor had been improperly appointed and appeared to be acting under heavy political pressure. The rulings raised serious doubts about the Justice Department’s professionalism and independence.
But the administration quickly shifted focus. Only hours after the courtroom defeats, the Pentagon revealed that it had opened an investigation into Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly, a decorated Navy veteran, NASA astronaut and well known public figure. Officials confirmed that the probe could lead to Kelly being recalled to active duty for possible military punishment based on a video in which he and other former service members reminded viewers that troops are not required to obey unlawful orders.
The new Pentagon move came shortly after Trump accused Kelly and several other Democratic lawmakers featured in the video of committing sedition. Trump claimed their remarks encouraged rebellion against the government and suggested such actions could be punishable by death.
Trump has repeatedly advertised his intention to use presidential power to pursue his political opponents in response to his own indictments. This promise was central to his 2024 campaign. The idea that the military could now be used against a sitting senator who previously served in uniform raises immediate concerns about the freedom of veterans to speak openly without fear of political retaliation.
It also signals further expansion of Trump’s long standing effort to use federal institutions as tools against adversaries. The recent breakdown of the Comey and James prosecutions shows how far that process has already advanced within the Justice Department.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has removed numerous senior military officers and replaced them with figures he views as personally loyal. CNN has reported that Hegseth has also dismissed top legal officials who questioned the legality of administration policies. These actions have intensified concerns that the Pentagon is being reshaped around political loyalty rather than professional judgment.
The idea that Kelly, a retired Navy captain with a distinguished record, could be pulled back into active duty for a potential court martial would take this campaign of retaliation into unprecedented territory.
Paul Rieckhoff, founder of Independent Veterans of America, said the message is unmistakable. “Trump wants people to understand that if he can target someone like Kelly, he can target anyone.” He added that recalling Kelly into service for possible punishment would be an act the modern military has never witnessed.
Kelly remains legally eligible for recall, as all senior military retirees are. The Pentagon stated that it could compel him to return to uniform for disciplinary action. It is unclear what charges could even be pursued, given that Kelly’s statement simply referenced a basic principle of military law that service members may follow only lawful orders under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
Legal experts doubt such a case would ever reach a court martial, since a conviction would set a dangerous precedent allowing the government to pursue any retired service member indefinitely for comments interpreted as criticism of the commander in chief.
The video that sparked the controversy has also raised questions about whether the Democratic lawmakers featured in it unnecessarily pulled the military into partisan conflict. Even so, the political environment surrounding the controversy is far from neutral. Trump has already directed military personnel into several US cities, with some deployments blocked by federal courts.
Critics also argue that the administration’s overseas operations against suspected drug traffickers have bypassed legal safeguards and risk violating both domestic and international law.