Rep. Eric Swalwell’s (D-CA) recent comments about a possible military check against President Trump triggered sharp reactions across the political spectrum. Swalwell told Don Lemon that some service members believe “We can be a check,” raising alarms among conservatives who see the remarks as an inappropriate suggestion that the military could act outside established constitutional authority. The controversy unfolded as the Department of War launched a review into Sen. Mark Kelly’s (D-AZ) appearance in a video encouraging troops to “refuse illegal orders.”
Swalwell said he hears from service members who believe congressional and judicial oversight has weakened. “They tell me that I don’t appreciate enough and the public doesn’t appreciate enough that while Congress is not a check on the president anymore, and the judiciary at the Supreme Court is hardly a check, military members have told me, ‘We can be a check,’” he said. He added that troops are committed to their oath, stating, “They’re essentially saying, ‘We’re not going to betray our oath to the Constitution because this guy tells us to.’”
He argued that the Trump administration signaled ulterior motives by responding to Kelly’s comments. “To me, the only reason you’d go after Mark Kelly if he’s telling soldiers, ‘You don’t have to follow an unlawful order’ — and they don’t — is if you intend to carry out unlawful orders,” he said.
Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) added pressure, warning there would be consequences if service members pursued actions against lawmakers. “Donald Trump is going to be gone in a couple of years,” Gallego said, cautioning troops about involvement in political disputes.
