You must disobey unlawful orders

Into the Night said:
It is not.

The military is fully authorized to put down insurrection, rioting, looting, organized crime, and to protect federal officers in the performance of their duty, such as ICE agents.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Democrats in CA do not get to buck all US laws in their state. It's sad that the rest of the country has to get them right.
Newsom has to go. He's like a fake store front that does nothing for anything, seriously.
In all seriousness, he could be arrested and removed from office for violating Article IV, Section 4 of The Constitution, others could as well, Mayorkas, for example.
 
Jake Starkey said:
I served in the infantry and then for the JAG Corps in the Republic of Korea and Camp Hood, both times at Division HQs. In the ROK, it was called 'serving at the flag pole' in Camp Casey, across the street from Div HQs.

You have admitted, did you not, that you have not served?

You have a right to your opinion. It is wrong. Kelly will not be tried, much less discharged. That will be the end of it.

You are very uninformed.
Click to expand...
You were never in the military, Sybil.
 
ZenMode said:
"When....."
Click to expand...
AI Summary:

The U.S. military code of conduct and the legal framework governing unlawful orders ultimately trace back to statutes created by the U.S. Congress and are enforced through a congressionally-authorized judicial system.


📜 Core statutory foundation​


  • U.S. service members are legally governed by the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), which is an act of Congress.
  • Congress has constitutional authority over the armed forces via:
    • Article I of the U.S. Constitution
    • and war/execution powers interfacing with Article II of the U.S. Constitution

⚖️ Who enforces unlawful order violations?​


Unlawful orders are litigated and punished in the military justice system through:


  • Courts‑martial, which exist because Congress legislated them.
  • Appeals flow into the civilian judiciary through the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF), also congressionally created.

🚫 The “illegal orders” principle inside statute​


The duty to refuse illegal orders is codified in multiple parts of the UCMJ, most notably:


  • Article 92 — obeying orders is required only if the order is lawful
  • Article 90 — implicitly excludes unlawful orders
  • Article 88 — limits conduct, not conscience to obey crimes

So the law protects obedience to command, but only within the boundaries of lawful orders, and the obligation to refuse unlawful orders is a statutory and legal concept, not just tradition.
 
ZenMode said:
"When....."
Click to expand...
So i state again, that Congress people are not just outside commentators on what the Trump admin is doing as they crafted those laws and maintain or change them.

Congress has a duty of Check and Balance, which includes policing of adherence (hearings), and potentially recommendations of prosecution to the DoJ and other 'punishment' remedies.

So a Congress person, as a DoJ official (local D.A., State Us Attorney, etc) has in society broadly would and SHOULD be stating their view of what the law is, how it is being followed or breached and if they think a law is being violated they NEED to voice that and if necessary then move on to other actions within their power.
 
QP! said:
So i state again, that Congress people are not just outside commentators on what the Trump admin is doing as they crafted those laws and maintain or change them.

Congress has a duty of Check and Balance, which includes policing of adherence (hearings), and potentially recommendations of prosecution to the DoJ and other 'punishment' remedies.

So a Congress person, as a DoJ official (local D.A., State Us Attorney, etc) has in society broadly would and SHOULD be stating their view of what the law is, how it is being followed or breached and if they think a law is being violated they NEED to voice that and if necessary then move on to other actions within their power.
Click to expand...
Congress offloaded most of their duties and responsibilities long ago.....it is now mostly a sham front for the oligarchs.

Constitutional order is over.
 
  • Like
Reactions: QP!
Into the Night said:
Uh...yes it is, Hawk. Piracy on the high seas is a crime. They are subject to immediate destruction by any nation. Smuggling on the high seas is a crime. They are subject to immediate destruction by any nation.
Click to expand...
I think uhh..some of them South American navies blow up all kinds of stuff regularly. 😆
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top