2026年2月12日 下午5:26 UTC / 路透社 / 作者：简·沃尔夫
华盛顿，2月12日（路透社） – 一名美国法官周四阻止五角大楼降低参议员马克·凯利的退役军衔和养老金，原因是他敦促军人拒绝非法命令。
美国地方法院法官理查德·利昂在华盛顿作出的初步裁决，是特朗普总统针对其认定的政治对手展开历史性报复运动的最新法庭挫折。这一报复运动遭到了来自各意识形态立场法官的反对。
路透社《内部动态》通讯是您了解全球体育重大赛事的必备指南。点击此处注册。
凯利是退役海军上尉、前宇航员，代表亚利桑那州参加美国参议院。他是去年11月一段视频中的六名国会民主党议员之一，该视频提醒军人履行拒绝非法命令的职责。在视频中，凯利表示：“我们的法律明确规定：你可以拒绝非法命令。”
利昂法官于2002年由时任美国总统乔治·W·布什任命，在裁决中称“本案涉及的言论无疑受到保护”，并指出惩罚凯利的行为明显违反了美国宪法第一修正案。
凯利对特朗普政府提起诉讼，要求停止对他的谴责。
利昂写道：“被告在此的行为毫无‘常规’可言：因一名在任美国参议员对军事政策的观点而惩罚他。”“我们国家特别需要退休老兵参与有关军事事务和政策的公共讨论。”
凯利对裁决表示赞赏，他在一份声明中称：“联邦法院明确指出（美国国防部长）彼得·黑格塞斯试图因我发表的言论惩罚我，这一行为违反了宪法。”
白宫发言人表示，法院的裁决并非此事的最终定论，“黑格塞斯有权根据参议员凯利这些危险言论的情况，决定未来的行动”。
五角大楼拒置评。
凯利在去年11月发表上述言论时，正值更多民主党人批评特朗普决定向美国城市部署国民警卫队，并授权对涉嫌从拉丁美洲走私毒品的船只发动致命打击。
这位共和党总统在社交媒体帖子中称该视频为“煽动性行为，应处以死刑”。
黑格塞斯于1月5日发出谴责信，称凯利“显然意图破坏良好秩序和军事纪律”，违反了适用于现役和退役人员的军事规定。
特朗普政府律师在最近的法庭文件中敦促法官驳回凯利的诉讼，称这是“典型的军事纪律问题，不属于司法管辖范围”。
特朗普政府还称该诉讼为时过早，称凯利尚未被正式谴责，应通过行政渠道回应黑格塞斯的指控。
报道：简·沃尔夫和迈克·斯卡尔塞拉；编辑：比尔·伯克罗特和尼亚·威廉姆斯
我们的标准：汤森路透信托原则。
US judge blocks Pentagon’s effort to punish Senator Mark Kelly
February 12, 2026 5:26 PM UTC / Reuters / By Jan Wolfe
WASHINGTON, Feb 12 (Reuters) – A U.S. judge blocked the Pentagon on Thursday from reducing Senator Mark Kelly’s retired military rank and pension pay because he urged troops to reject unlawful orders.
The preliminary ruling by U.S. District Judge Richard Leon in Washington is the latest setback in court for President Donald Trump’s historic campaign of vengeance against his perceived political enemies, which has drawn pushback from judges across the ideological spectrum.
The Reuters Inside Track newsletter is your essential guide to the biggest events in global sport. Sign up here.
Kelly, a retired Navy captain and former astronaut who represents Arizona in the U.S. Senate, was one of six congressional Democrats who appeared in a November video that reminded service members of their duty to reject unlawful orders. In the clip, Kelly stated: “Our laws are clear: You can refuse illegal orders.”
节点运行失败
Leon, appointed by then-U.S. President George W. Bush in 2002, in his ruling said “the speech at issue here is unquestionably protected speech,” describing the move to punish Kelly as a clear violation of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment.
Kelly brought a lawsuit against the Trump administration to halt the censure.
“There is nothing ‘routine’ about defendants’ actions here: punishing a sitting U.S. Senator for his views on military policy,” Leon wrote. “It is a particularly valuable asset for our country to have retired veterans contributing to public discussion on military matters and policy.”
Kelly applauded the ruling, saying in a statement that “a federal court made clear that (U.S. Defense Secretary) Pete Hegseth violated the constitution when he tried to punish me for something I said.”
A White House spokesperson said the court’s ruling would not be the final say on the matter and that “Hegseth rightfully directed a review to determine future actions as a result of these dangerous comments by Senator Kelly”.
The Pentagon declined to comment.
Kelly made his remarks in November as more Democrats were criticizing Trump’s decisions to deploy the National Guard in U.S. cities and authorize lethal strikes on boats suspected of smuggling drugs from Latin America.
The Republican president, in a social media post, called the video “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH.”
Hegseth issued a censure letter on January 5, asserting that Kelly had “clearly intended to undermine good order and military discipline” in violation of military rules that apply to both active and retired personnel.
Trump administration lawyers had urged the judge to dismiss Kelly’s lawsuit, calling it a “quintessential matter of military discipline not within the Judiciary’s purview” in a recent court filing.
The Trump administration also called the lawsuit premature, saying Kelly has not yet been formally censured and should have responded to Hegseth’s allegations through administrative channels.
Reporting By Jan Wolfe and Mike Scarcella; Editing by Bill Berkrot and Nia Williams
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
发表回复