Obeying an unlawful order is a special situation for the officer class. Their oath specifically excludes the requirement to ‘follow the orders of the President and those appointed over them’ (sic). However, they still fall under the UCMJ and therefore when they refuse an order can fase article 15/captain’s mast/officer hours (depending on service they give it different names - it’s all article 15 UCMJ). They can refuse the article and demand a CM - then the prosecutor gets involved. If it was truly an unlawful order at that time it may come out in the investigation and the original order giver may be charged. As I recall there have been cases where both cases proceeded in parallel and in some cases both were found guilty and the lower officer was later acquitted on appeal using the verdict of the 2nd trial to overturn their own. In the end - unless someone is telling you to rape, murder, pillage - you probably won’t win the case. So the answer is follow the order and submit your protest in parrallel.
The oath runs in parallel, by the way with the fact that officer appointments and promotions while made by the president, are approved by congress. GHW signed mine and somewhere I have some of the radio traffic where the promotions were transmitted by SecNav after review and approval by congress - which until you get to the stars are usually rubber stamps, though some do have help that others don’t.
It’s Lakin’s right to disobey and frankly I think he’s courageous in doing what he believes - but he will likely be found guilty. The military isn’t the civilian world. They only need to show he disobeyed a direct order to meet the requirements of the guilty verdict. He must prove it is an illegal order, a much higher bar to meet. The military will do what it needs to in order to ensure good order and discipline. In my view it isn’t their place to question O’s eligibility it is Congress’. Plus I’m not really happy with the entire court system punting on the whole “standing” BS. I’m a citizen I have standing on matters of constitutional importance - period.
Now there is no reason why senior brass could not petition congress about concerns related to good order and discipline related to this issue. However, they put themselves between a rock and a hard place and end up creating more havoc than what currently exists if they aren’t careful.
It doesn’t make me happy or proud of the situation - but I do understand where the two sides are coming from in the service.
I really could use those strawberries now...
Not sure why you want the strawberries but I’ve got some in the freezer you could have if you like. lol.
The problem I see with the standard of having to obey an order unless it’s an order to rape and pillage is that it renders the actual elements of Article 92 moot. Why even mention that orders are unlawful if contrary to the Constitution, if constitutionality will never even be addressed?
And that’s precisely what makes me believe that the nation will be screwed if Obama decides to use the military for his progressive agenda. Because the military will never consider it appropriate for it to even question the constitutionality. As long as Obama doesn’t tell them to rape and pillage they will just follow orders.
It renders the officer’s oath impotent as well. Nobody will ever actually act on that oath to protect and defend the Constitution because if they did they would be butchered by the UCMJ system unless the “domestic enemy” looked like Snidely Whiplash and outright told them to shred the Constitution, which an enemy would never do until they were too crazy to be effective anyway.
I told my nephew/godson when he was commissioned last spring that he’s getting in at a time when it will be very difficult if not impossible to actually keep the oath he just made.
Judge Denise Lind made judicial note of Congress certifying Obama as the winner of the electoral vote, but there is an active lawsuit (filed before Obama was inaugurated and lolly-gagging its way along through the system at a snail’s pace) based on the fact that Cheney did not fulfill the legal requirement of asking Congress for any objections. IOW, Obama was never LAWFULLY certified as the electoral winner. Without that happening, he could not Constitutionally be inaugurated as POTUS. So the process itself tells us that Obama cannot be giving lawful orders at this point in time.
I just don’t see how any officer could NOT have the responsibility to object. Legally speaking, *I* am as qualified as Obama to act as CINC. What should the military officers do if I tried ordering them around?
I blame the whole thing on SCOTUS. There is no way they should have allowed this Constitutional crisis. I suspect that they did so because Soros threatened them with bringing the country to financial ruin through another run on the bank if anybody stalled the Obama coup. I believe the judges and justices have left telling clues behind to protest the decisions they made under duress.