Trump's Second Coming: Will the Military Have His Back?

The prospect of a second Trump administration has rekindled an important debate from four years ago, raising questions about the military's obligations to the president. It's a topic that has garnered significant attention in recent years, particularly in light of Trump's divisive rhetoric and actions during his first term in office.

At the heart of the debate is a fundamental misconception about the military's role in American democracy. Many people assume that the military is duty-bound to comply with the president's orders, regardless of their legitimacy or constitutionality. However, this notion is not only incorrect but also potentially dangerous.

In reality, the military is sworn to uphold the Constitution, not to follow the president blindly. As part of their oath of enlistment, military personnel pledge to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic," and to "obey the orders of the President of the United States and the officers appointed over" them. The key phrase here is "appointed over" them, which refers to the military chain of command.

This means that military personnel are not required to follow orders that are unlawful, unconstitutional, or outside the scope of their authority. In fact, they have a duty to disobey such orders, as following them would be a breach of their oath to uphold the Constitution.

This important distinction has been recognized by military leaders and civilian officials alike. In testimony before Congress, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley emphasized that military personnel are not obligated to follow orders that are "unlawful or immoral." Similarly, the Defense Department's Law of War Manual states that military personnel have a duty to disobey orders that are "manifestly unlawful" or "contrary to international law.

Despite this, the misconception about the military's obligations to the president persists. It's a myth that has been fueled by Trump's own rhetoric and actions, including his claims that the military is "my military" and his attempts to use the military for partisan purposes.

The consequences of this misconception are far-reaching and potentially disastrous. If the military were to follow orders that are unlawful or unconstitutional, it could lead to a breakdown in the rule of law and the erosion of civil liberties. It could also undermine the military's legitimacy and credibility, both domestically and internationally.

As the country considers the prospect of a second Trump administration, it's essential to remember that the military is not a tool for personal or partisan gain. It's a vital institution that plays a critical role in defending American democracy and upholding the Constitution. We must be vigilant in ensuring that the military is used in a way that is consistent with its oath to uphold the Constitution, and that its personnel are not asked to follow orders that are unlawful or unconstitutional.