U.S. Representative Jason Crow (D-CO) and five other military veterans have publicly stated that members of the U.S. military must refuse to follow illegal orders from President Donald Trump. In a video released last week, Crow emphasized, “No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution.” The remarks sparked outrage from Trump, who labeled the lawmakers as traitors and suggested they should face severe consequences.
Trump’s inflammatory comments included a social media post where he stated, “HANG THEM GEORGE WASHINGTON WOULD !!” Although he later attempted to clarify that he did not advocate for their deaths, the implications of his words raised serious concerns. Crow and his colleagues reported receiving death threats following Trump’s remarks.
Legal experts have weighed in on the situation, including Joseph Jordan, a former U.S. Army officer and attorney specializing in military law. He referenced the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which stipulates that service members must obey orders unless they are “patently illegal,” such as those directing the commission of a crime. Disobeying orders can lead to court martial, with a military judge determining the lawfulness of the order.
In an opinion piece for the New York Times, attorney David French, who also served in Iraq, discussed the complexities surrounding military orders. He highlighted that while shooting a prisoner is unequivocally illegal, bombings targeting suspected insurgent locations can be legally ambiguous. French criticized Trump’s orders to target suspected drug traffickers in the Caribbean, arguing that they place military leaders in a precarious ethical position and burden soldiers with moral dilemmas.
Historical Parallels with the Sand Creek Massacre
The current discourse recalls the Sand Creek Massacre on November 29, 1864, where Captain Silas Soule and Lieutenant Joseph Cramer refused to engage in the killing of approximately 200 Cheyenne and Arapahoe natives, mostly women and children. This tragic event occurred in a context marked by tension between U.S. settlers and Indigenous peoples in Colorado, which had only recently become a territory in 1861.
In the fall of 1864, a delegation of Cheyenne and Arapahoe leaders sought peace with Colorado’s territorial governor, John Evans, who was present but largely unresponsive during negotiations. The native leaders were assured safety, leading them to camp along a dry creek bed in southeastern Colorado. Colonel John Chivington, a prominent Civil War hero, had other intentions. Motivated by personal ambition, he led an overnight march to the camp, where the natives displayed the American flag as a sign of their peaceful intentions.
Chivington’s troops attacked the encampment at dawn, resulting in a massacre that horrified many, including Soule and Cramer. They wrote letters to their commanding officer, Major Edward Wynkoop, expressing their condemnation of the violence. An Army investigation followed, but Soule did not live to see full accountability; he was assassinated the following April in Denver.
Legacy and Accountability
The actions and silence of political leaders during the Sand Creek Massacre remain subjects of scrutiny. Reports commissioned by Northwestern University and the University of Denver in 2014 found that Evans bore significant responsibility for the events that led to the massacre. The University of Denver’s report stated that Evans “created the conditions in which the massacre was highly likely.”
The contrasting legacies of Soule and Evans are marked by their graves in Riverside Cemetery, Denver. Soule’s grave is modest, with flowers left by visitors, while Evans’ site remains largely unvisited, reflecting on the differing perceptions of their actions during a critical moment in American history.
As contemporary lawmakers like Crow confront the ethical implications of military orders in a modern context, the historical parallels highlight the ongoing struggle for moral courage in the face of authority. The challenges faced by service members today echo the decisions made by soldiers in the past, underscoring the importance of integrity and adherence to the law.
