Trump Blasts Democrats for 'Seditious' Military Order Advice, Sparks 'Punishable by Death' Controversy

Trump Accuses Democrats of Sedition Over Military Order Advice

In a significant escalation of political rhetoric, United States President Donald Trump has vehemently accused several Democratic members of Congress of "seditious behavior." This sharp condemnation came after six Democrats, all veterans or former intelligence officials, released a video urging military and intelligence personnel to reject "illegal" commands.

The Democrats' Warning to Military Officials

The controversy unfolded in mid-November 2025. On November 18, Senators Elissa Slotkin (Michigan), Mark Kelly (Arizona), and Representatives Chris Deluzio (Pennsylvania), Maggie Goodlander (New Hampshire), Chrissy Houlahan (Pennsylvania), and Jason Crow (Colorado) posted a video on social media. Addressing current military and intelligence officers, they stated, "We know you are under enormous stress and pressure right now. Americans trust their military, but that trust is at risk." They emphasized the oath to defend the Constitution, asserting that threats now come "from right here at home" and that personnel "must refuse illegal orders."

Trump's Fiery Retaliation: 'Punishable by Death'

President Trump responded with fury on his Truth Social platform. On Thursday, November 20, he branded the lawmakers' actions as "SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL," demanding their arrest and trial. He asserted, "Their words cannot be allowed to stand – We won’t have a Country anymore!!! An example MUST BE SET." Later that day, he intensified his rhetoric, suggesting the behavior was "punishable by DEATH!" However, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt clarified to reporters in Washington, DC, that the President did not intend for members of Congress to be executed, while also defending the legality of all presidential orders.

Defining 'Illegal Orders': Democrats Provide Examples

Republicans questioned the Democrats' failure to specify which orders they deemed illegal. Representative Eli Crane (Arizona) labeled this omission as cowardly. When pressed by Fox News anchor Martha Callum, Representative Jason Crow cited instances from Trump's first term, including the 2020 Lafayette Square protests where Trump allegedly suggested shooting protestors, his threats to deploy the military to cities like Chicago, and allusions to sending troops to polling stations – the latter being a violation of US criminal law. Crow also pointed to recent US bombing campaigns against alleged Venezuelan drug trafficking boats in the Caribbean Sea as violating US law, writing on X, "The President is trampling on the Constitution. Stop politicizing our troops. Stop illegal military strikes. Stop pitting our servicemembers against the American people."

These strikes, which have reportedly killed over 60 people, drew international criticism. UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk had previously called these attacks "unacceptable" and "extrajudicial killing," stressing that lethal force is permissible only as a last resort against imminent threats to life, even in anti-drug operations.

Democrats Stand Firm Against Trump's Threats

In response to Trump's "seditious" and "punishable by death" comments, the six Democratic lawmakers issued a joint statement late on Thursday. They declared, "No threat, intimidation, or call for violence will deter us from that sacred obligation," adding that Trump's reaction made it clear that "the president considers it punishable by death for us to restate the law." They urged Americans to unite and condemn "the President’s calls for our murder and political violence," concluding with, "Don’t Give Up the Ship!"

Minority Leader Chuck Schumer echoed their concerns in the Senate, calling Trump's statements an "outright threat" and "deadly serious," warning that Trump was "lighting a match in a country soaked with political gasoline." The US Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 92, mandates punishment for those who violate or fail to obey lawful orders, but implicitly, military members are not bound to follow unlawful orders.