By Devan Cole | 2026年2月12日更新，美国东部时间下午1:29 | 2026年2月12日发布，美国东部时间中午12:37
US Senator Mark Kelly speaks on the failed grand jury indictment against him during a news conference at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC, on February 11, 2026.
Heather Diehl/Getty Images
周四，一名联邦法官驳回了国防部长彼得·赫格塞斯试图因民主党参议员马克·凯利敦促美军士兵拒绝”非法命令”而对其进行惩罚的企图，裁定五角大楼负责人的行为构成违宪报复。
这一裁决是在华盛顿特区大陪审团两天前拒绝批准联邦检察官对这位亚利桑那州参议员及其他几名民主党议员提出的指控后作出的。这些民主党议员去年录制了一段视频，警告称”对我们宪法的威胁”正”来自我们国内”，并反复恳求美军士兵和情报界人员”拒绝非法命令”。
大陪审团的不予起诉决定与美国联邦地区高级法官理查德·利昂的裁决共同构成了重大障碍，阻碍了唐纳德·特朗普总统助手们试图利用政府杠杆，因凯利参与该视频而对其进行惩罚。凯利是退役海军上尉和前宇航员。
利昂是前总统乔治·W·布什任命的法官，他在一份29页的严厉裁决中写道，赫格塞斯正在践踏凯利的第一修正案权利，其行为属于不可容忍的政府报复行为。
“凯利参议员可能是个’异常坚定的人’，但这并不能削弱他免受因行使第一修正案权利而受到报复的权利，”利昂写道，”凯利参议员因行使其就公共关切事项发表言论的第一修正案权利而受到斥责。”
法官指出，五角大楼针对的是”毫无疑问受到保护的言论”，而这种言论在法律上实际上应受到”特殊保护”。
司法部可能会对利昂的裁决提出上诉，该部门坚持认为赫格塞斯的行为不受联邦法院审查，或者至少在审理此类争端时，法官应给予极大尊重。
凯利周四对利昂的裁决表示赞赏，他在一份声明中承认：”这可能还没完，因为这位总统和他的政府不知道何时该承认自己错了。”
“有一件事是肯定的：无论特朗普政府多么努力地惩罚我并压制他人，我都会加倍努力抗争。这太重要了，”参议员表示。
凯利的案件是在上个月提出的，此前赫格塞斯宣布五角大楼将对该参议员采取行政行动，包括降低其最后的军衔（这将减少他作为退役海军上尉的收入）并发出谴责信。
赫格塞斯和特朗普都公开抨击了凯利11月发布的一段视频。在这段视频中，这位亚利桑那州议员与另外五名有军事或情报服务背景的民主党人一起，敦促士兵不要服从特朗普政府可能发布的非法命令。
“从整体上看，你的行为模式表明你有明确意图，即建议军人拒绝合法命令。这一模式表明，你并非在提供关于拒绝明显非法命令的抽象法律教育，而是在具体建议军人拒绝你所描述为非法的特定行动，”赫格塞斯上个月在谴责信中写道。
利昂坚决拒绝了赫格塞斯试图将现役军人第一修正案保护的现有漏洞扩大到凯利等退休人员的企图，并恳请政府”感谢过去250年来退休军人在我国军事事务的公共讨论和辩论中所带来的智慧和专业知识”。
利昂援引了前高级军事官员提交的法庭之友简报，这些官员警告称，许多军人因担心遭到报复而不敢就公共重要事项发表意见。他称这种现实是”自由国家中令人不安的发展”！
“被告的论点与我国长期以来的传统相抵触，即包括担任民选职务的退休军人在内的退休军人，经常以批评当前军事政策的方式参与公共讨论，”他写道。
报复行动遇阻
利昂是最新一位挫败特朗普试图打击其认定的政治对手的联邦法官。在其他几起案件中，法官通过驳回针对前联邦调查局局长詹姆斯·科米和纽约总检察长莱蒂西亚·詹姆斯的刑事诉讼，并裁定总统试图削弱著名告密者律师马克·扎伊德工作的企图违法，阻碍了总统的报复运动。
在11月发布的”非法命令”视频中，议员们没有具体说明军人收到或可能收到的哪些命令可能是非法的。
但该视频发布之际，包括美国南方司令部司令在内的美军官员以及包括英国在内的美国盟友质疑针对加勒比海和东太平洋涉嫌毒贩的一系列军事打击的合法性，同时特朗普政府去年向民主党领导的城市派遣大量联邦化国民警卫队成员的决定也面临多个法庭挑战。
该视频激怒了特朗普，他暗示这六名议员从事”可处死刑的煽动叛乱行为”！
据报道，美国司法部检察官在周二向大陪审团提交案件时，提出了较轻的指控。
尽管大陪审团通常很少拒绝批准检察官寻求的指控，但随着政府提起法律上存疑的案件，这种拒绝在近几个月更为频繁。检察官可以再次尝试获得对这些议员的起诉。
本报道于周四更新了更多细节。
Judge says Pete Hegseth is unlawfully retaliating against Sen. Mark Kelly over ‘illegal orders’ video
By Devan Cole | Updated Feb 12, 2026, 1:29 PM ET | PUBLISHED Feb 12, 2026, 12:37 PM ET
US Senator Mark Kelly speaks on the failed grand jury indictment against him during a news conference at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC, on February 11, 2026.
Heather Diehl/Getty Images
A federal judge on Thursday shut down Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s attempts to punish Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly over his urging of US service members to refuse illegal orders, ruling that the Pentagon chief’s actions were unconstitutionally retaliatory.
The decision landed two days after a grand jury in Washington, DC, declined to approve charges sought by federal prosecutors against the Arizona senator and several other Democratic lawmakers who taped a video last year warning that “threats to our Constitution” are coming “from right here at home,” and repeatedly implored service members and the intelligence community to “refuse illegal orders.”
Together, the grand jury declination and ruling from senior US District Judge Richard Leon represent major impediments to efforts by aides of President Donald Trump to use the levers of government to punish Kelly, a retired Navy captain and former astronaut, over his participation in the video.
Leon, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, wrote in a scathing, 29-page ruling that Hegseth was trampling over the First Amendment rights of Kelly and that his moves are an impermissible form of government retaliation.
“That Senator Kelly may be an ‘unusually staunch individual’ does not minimize his entitlement to be free from reprisal for exercising his First Amendment rights,” Leon wrote. “Senator Kelly was reprimanded for exercising his First Amendment right to speak on matters of public concern.”
The Pentagon, the judge wrote, was targeting “unquestionably protected speech” that is actually entitled to “special protection” under the law.
The decision is likely to be appealed by the Justice Department, which insists that Hegseth’s actions are unreviewable by federal courts or, at the very least, owed a great deal of deference by judges examining disputes like the one at hand.
Applauding Leon’s ruling Thursday, Kelly acknowledged in a statement that “this might not be over yet, because this President and this administration do not know how to admit when they’re wrong.”
“One thing is for sure: however hard the Trump administration may fight to punish me and silence others, I will fight ten times harder. This is too important,” the senator said.
Kelly’s case, brought last month, came just after Hegseth announced the Pentagon would pursue administrative action against the senator, including reducing his last military rank, which would lower the pay he receives as a retired Navy captain, and issuing a letter of censure.
Both Hegseth and Trump have publicly attacked Kelly over a video posted in November by the Arizona lawmaker – and five other Democrats with a history of military or intelligence service – urging service members not to obey unlawful orders that could be issued by the Trump administration.
“When viewed in totality, your pattern of conduct demonstrates specific intent to counsel servicemembers to refuse lawful orders. This pattern demonstrates that you were not providing abstract legal education about the duty to refuse patently illegal orders. You were specifically counseling servicemembers to refuse particular operations that you have characterized as illegal,” Hegseth wrote to Kelly last month in the censure letter.
Leon forcefully rejected Hegseth’s attempt to extend existing loopholes on First Amendment protections for active-duty service members to retirees such as Kelly, imploring the administration to “be grateful for the wisdom and expertise that retired servicemembers have brought to public discussions and debate on military matters in our Nation over the past 250 years.”
Citing a friend-of-the-court brief filed by former high-ranking military officials who warned that many service members are already declining to opine on matters of public importance out of fear of also being retaliated against, Leon called that reality “a troubling development in a free country!”
“Defendants’ argument runs up against our Nation’s long tradition of retired service members, including those holding elected office, routinely contributing to the public discourse in ways critical of current military policy,” he wrote.
Retribution campaign hits roadblocks
Leon is the latest federal judge to frustrate Trump’s efforts to go after his perceived political enemies. In several other cases, judges have stymied the president’s retribution crusade by killing criminal cases brought against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James and ruling against the president’s attempts to hamstring the work of Mark Zaid, a notable whistleblower attorney.
In the “illegal orders” video released in November, the lawmakers don’t specify which orders service members have received, or might receive, that could be illegal.
But it was posted as US military officials, including the commander of US Southern Command, and US allies, including the UK, questioned the legality of a series of military strikes targeting suspected drug traffickers in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific and as the Trump administration faced multiple court challenges to Trump’s decision last year to send scores of federalized state National Guard members to Democratic-led cities.
The video enraged Trump, who suggested the six lawmakers engaged in “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”
Prosecutors from the US Attorney’s Office in DC reportedly pursued less serious charges when they presented their case to the grand jury on Tuesday.
Though it’s generally rare for grand juries to decline to approve charges sought by prosecutors, such rejections have occurred more frequently in recent months as the administration has pursued legally dubious cases. Prosecutors can try again to secure the indictments against the lawmakers.
This story has been updated with additional details Thursday.
