Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share Refusing Unlawful Orders: What the Law Actually Requires—And Why Republicans Are Dead Wrong
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
Refusing Unlawful Orders: What the Law Actually Requires—And Why Republicans Are Dead Wrong
In this episode of The Rule of Law Brief, attorney and former Navy officer Nate Charles dismantles the latest wave of Republican attacks on Democratic lawmakers who reminded U.S. servicemembers of a simple legal truth: troops must obey lawful orders and refuse unlawful ones.
Drawing on his own training at the U.S. Naval Academy—where within the first week midshipmen are taught the distinction between lawful and unlawful orders—Nate walks through the bedrock principles of military leadership, the controlling Supreme Court precedents, and the UCMJ provisions that demand refusal of manifestly illegal commands.
He then explains, with precision and legal clarity, why Republican accusations of “sedition” collapse instantly under modern First Amendment doctrine, and why the Democrats’ message is not only correct but essential. The episode highlights the narrow scope of federal sedition statutes, the constitutional protections that limit them, and the Brandenburg standard that governs all advocacy-based prosecutions.
Finally, Nate lays out a concise but devastating catalogue of illegal or unconstitutional orders issued by Donald Trump, including:
* Illegal domestic troop deployments
* ICE arrest quotas and unconstitutional mass detentions
* Pentagon gag orders on congressional communications
* Unauthorized use of military force
* National Security Presidential Directive–7 targeting lawful dissent
* Antideficiency Act violations
* Government retaliation against protected speech
* Unlawful ICE raids on protected locations
Each example is grounded in established law and public record—not speculation or rhetoric.
This episode ends with a blunt warning to anyone still enabling unconstitutional conduct inside the national-security and military community: those who support violations of the Constitution are acting as enemies of the rule of law.
Stay ahead of the rising constitutional crisis.
Subscribe for grounded, legally rigorous analysis at the intersection of national security, the rule of law, and democratic resilience. Every episode cuts through political noise and explains exactly what the law requires—no spin, no sugarcoating.
Get full access to The Rule of Law Brief at natecharles.substack.com/subscribe
View all episodes
By Nathan M. F. Charles — Former federal prosecutor and Navy SEAL officer; Managing Partner at Charles International Law.In this episode of The Rule of Law Brief, attorney and former Navy officer Nate Charles dismantles the latest wave of Republican attacks on Democratic lawmakers who reminded U.S. servicemembers of a simple legal truth: troops must obey lawful orders and refuse unlawful ones.
Drawing on his own training at the U.S. Naval Academy—where within the first week midshipmen are taught the distinction between lawful and unlawful orders—Nate walks through the bedrock principles of military leadership, the controlling Supreme Court precedents, and the UCMJ provisions that demand refusal of manifestly illegal commands.
He then explains, with precision and legal clarity, why Republican accusations of “sedition” collapse instantly under modern First Amendment doctrine, and why the Democrats’ message is not only correct but essential. The episode highlights the narrow scope of federal sedition statutes, the constitutional protections that limit them, and the Brandenburg standard that governs all advocacy-based prosecutions.
Finally, Nate lays out a concise but devastating catalogue of illegal or unconstitutional orders issued by Donald Trump, including:
* Illegal domestic troop deployments
* ICE arrest quotas and unconstitutional mass detentions
* Pentagon gag orders on congressional communications
* Unauthorized use of military force
* National Security Presidential Directive–7 targeting lawful dissent
* Antideficiency Act violations
* Government retaliation against protected speech
* Unlawful ICE raids on protected locations
Each example is grounded in established law and public record—not speculation or rhetoric.
This episode ends with a blunt warning to anyone still enabling unconstitutional conduct inside the national-security and military community: those who support violations of the Constitution are acting as enemies of the rule of law.
Stay ahead of the rising constitutional crisis.
Subscribe for grounded, legally rigorous analysis at the intersection of national security, the rule of law, and democratic resilience. Every episode cuts through political noise and explains exactly what the law requires—no spin, no sugarcoating.
Get full access to The Rule of Law Brief at natecharles.substack.com/subscribe