Sen. Mark Kelly sues Pete Hegseth’s Pentagon after Trump administration moved to punish him for his speech

Sen. Mark Kelly, a Democrat from Arizona, filed suit Monday, accusing the Trump administration of attempting to weaponize the U.S. military against a sitting lawmaker, challenging what he calls an unprecedented campaign of retaliation for constitutionally protected speech that now threatens his military rank, pension, and personal safety.

Keep up with the latest in LGBTQ+ news and politics. Sign up for The Advocate's email newsletter.

The 46-page complaint, filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, names Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, the Department of Defense, and the Department of the Navy as defendants. It seeks to block a formal Letter of Censure and halt proceedings that could reduce Kelly’s retired Navy rank and corresponding pension — a move his lawyers describe as an effort to punish a senator for criticizing the administration’s military actions.

Related: Mark Kelly defiant as ‘most unqualified Secretary of Defense’ Pete Hegseth targets senator’s retirement pay

Kelly, a retired Navy captain, astronaut, and member of the Senate Armed Services and Intelligence committees, says the dispute began after he and five other lawmakers released a November video reminding service members that they are legally obligated to refuse unlawful orders, a bedrock principle of military law. The Trump administration branded the video “seditious.” President Donald Trump publicly suggested that the lawmakers should be prosecuted, jailed, or even executed. Kelly says he later received death threats that required special security.

Last week, Hegseth issued a formal censure accusing Kelly of undermining the chain of command, counseling disobedience, and engaging in “conduct unbecoming an officer.” He simultaneously ordered a rare review of Kelly’s retirement grade, which could result in demotion and reduced retirement pay more than a decade after Kelly left active duty.

Related: Pete Buttigieg calls Pete Hegseth ‘unfit to lead’ after second bombshell Signal chat leak revelation

In the January 5 censure letter, Hegseth accuses Kelly of engaging in a “sustained pattern of public statements” that “characterized lawful military operations as illegal” and “counseled members of the Armed Forces to refuse orders,” citing Kelly’s participation in the “Don’t Give Up the Ship” video and his subsequent statements defending it.

Hegseth’s letter further alleges that Kelly undermined the chain of command, created “confusion about duty,” and asserts that his conduct has harmed morale, discipline, and public confidence in the armed forces.

The letter states that the censure will be placed in Kelly’s official military file and that the Pentagon will reopen his retirement grade determination under federal law. Hegseth also warns that Kelly remains subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice and could face criminal prosecution if he continues to make similar statements.

The November video did not instruct troops to disobey legal orders.

Soon after the video was released, the Department of Defense came under intense scrutiny for a September bombing of a boat in the Caribbean Sea off the coast of Venezuela that the U.S. government claimed, without releasing evidence, was a drug-smuggling boat. After the initial strike, two of the occupants of the boat remained alive and shipwrecked. According to reports, the Navy initiated a so-called “double-tap” strike, bombing the helpless survivors additional times, leaving them dead. According to the U.S. military’s own guidebooks, attacking shipwrecked people is illegal.

Kelly has called Hegseth “the most unqualified secretary of defense in our country’s history” and warned that the move sends a chilling message to retired service members nationwide: Speak out, and the Pentagon may come for your livelihood.

The lawsuit argues that federal law governing retirement grades applies only to conduct while on active duty, not to post-retirement political speech, and that the administration’s actions violate the First Amendment, the separation of powers, and the Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause, which protects lawmakers.

“The First Amendment forbids the government and its officials from punishing disfavored expression or retaliating against protected speech,” the complaint notes.