Opinion - Claiming 'just following orders' won't excuse high-seas killings

During the Nuremberg trials, Nazis accused of horrifying crimes tried to defend themselves by claiming they were "merely following orders." That defense was rejected. Modern law and military ethics maintain that obeying illegal or unconstitutional orders is never justified.

Recently, six members of Congress reminded the armed forces of this principle, only to be accused of sedition by President Trump. Military law requires service members to refuse clearly illegal commands and holds them accountable for carrying out unlawful actions. This standard is embedded in the Uniform Code of Military Justice and reflects a long-standing commitment to individual accountability in wartime.

Historical precedent supports this principle. In the 1852 Supreme Court case Mitchell v. Harmony, an officer could not defend unlawful property seizure by claiming he was following orders. The court ruled that obeying an illegal directive cannot excuse unlawful acts.

The lawmakers, all veterans or former CIA personnel and led by Senator Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), issued a video urging service members to decline illegal orders. Critics aligned with Trump have labeled this as seditious, arguing it suggests that some presidential orders might be unlawful and undermines the chain of command. Administration officials claim the reminder encourages disobedience to lawful orders, though legal analysts and former military officials counter that certain strikes under Trumps administration were illegal extrajudicial killings.

United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Trk has stated that these strikes violate international human rights law. One incident in September involved a second strike on survivors of a boat initially set ablaze, reportedly ordered verbally by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth. The Pentagon has since updated protocols to prevent such actions, and controversies surrounding the chain of command led Admiral Alvin Holsey to retire.

Investigations are ongoing. Hegseth announced a probe into Senator Kellys conduct, and the FBI has reportedly sought interviews with the lawmakers. Trump has previously suggested military tribunals as a means of targeting political opponents, including former Rep. Liz Cheney.

Kelly, reflecting on his military career and oath to the Constitution, emphasized that attempts to intimidate him and his colleagues will not succeed. The lawmakers affirmed their commitment to uphold the Constitution despite threats or harassment.

As of now, at least 83 individuals have died in 21 attacks on alleged traffickers vessels, with no contraband recovered and little evidence to justify the strikes, raising serious questions about the legality and necessity of these actions.

Author: Zoe Harrison