Pete Hegseth Strips Sen. Mark Kelly of Military Rank Over ‘Illegal Orders’ Video

(AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced unprecedented administrative action against Sen. Mark Kelly, accusing the Arizona Democrat of “seditious” conduct and initiating a process that could strip the retired Navy captain of rank and reduce his military pension.

In a statement posted to X on Monday morning, Hegseth said the Department of Defense had begun retirement grade determination proceedings under 10 U.S.C. § 1370(f) against Kelly, citing public comments in which the senator urged service members to refuse illegal orders.

Hegseth also said he issued a formal Letter of Censure that will be placed in Kelly’s permanent military personnel file.

The dispute centers on a broader and increasingly heated debate between the Pentagon and Democratic lawmakers over the legality of recent U.S. military operations and the role of members of Congress in questioning them. Kelly and other lawmakers have argued that service members must refuse unlawful orders, while Hegseth and his allies contend such messaging undermines military discipline by casting doubt on the legality of duly authorized operations.

Kelly, a former Navy fighter pilot who retired at the rank of captain, is currently serving his second term in the U.S. Senate.

Hegseth characterized a video released earlier this year by Kelly and five other members of Congress as “reckless and seditious,” accusing the senator of undermining good order and military discipline. The video reminded service members that they have a legal obligation to refuse illegal orders, a principle embedded in U.S. military law and the laws of armed conflict.

The confrontation follows mounting scrutiny over the legal justification for U.S. military actions in Latin America, including discussions within the administration about removing Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

On Sunday’s This Week, Secretary of State Marco Rubio struggled to identify clear legal authority for such action, drawing criticism from lawmakers who argue that ambiguous or unsupported justifications heighten the risk of unlawful orders being issued or followed.

Hegseth asserted that Kelly remains subject to military justice as a retired officer receiving retired pay and accused him of violating Articles 133 and 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, provisions covering conduct unbecoming an officer and general misconduct.

The move is highly unusual. While retired officers technically remain subject to the UCMJ in limited circumstances, the authority is rarely invoked and has not been used to punish post-retirement political speech, particularly by a sitting member of Congress.

Retirement grade determinations are typically limited to misconduct committed while an officer is on active duty.

Hegseth warned that Kelly’s status as a U.S. senator does not exempt him from accountability and suggested further action could follow.

Kelly has not yet publicly responded. The announcement is likely to prompt legal challenges and congressional scrutiny, placing the Pentagon at the center of a constitutional dispute over military authority, civilian oversight, and protected political speech.