Politics
Opinion: What will the military do if Trump gives unconstitutional orders?
Every American in the armed forces, and any veteran who has served, hopes and prays for peace and stability under the recently reelected, incoming commander in chief. Political leanings are no factor here. We salute and serve because that’s who we are — even as our oaths may soon be tested as the next frontline in the war for America’s soul.
Everyone in the military takes an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Enlisted service members also swear to “obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.” Given Donald Trump’s threats to use the military against his own enemies, some wonder with dread: What will the military do if the president gives unconstitutional orders? While nobody would ever want such a challenge, I am fully confident that Americans in uniform will honor the highest duty we swore, which is to the Constitution.
My introduction to the oath came at West Point, when a Vietnam War veteran and professor put it to me straight: “Just who do you want to be? An employee? Or a professional, self-abnegating servant of the nation?” It was an admonition and expectation that, decades on, may be the most consistent North Star I’ve known. I fought with better men than me who died in Iraq, I spent years and years overseas missing birthdays and everydays with my young daughters, and my final act in uniform was to give away a kidney at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. I wouldn’t have done those things if I hadn’t meant the words spoken at my commissioning ceremony, pledging my “true faith and allegiance,” which means more to me than my next breath even now that I’ve retired from active service.
I’m not alone. Millions of others put that same oath at the center of their lives. I liken it to a baptism; instead of joining a faith community, we pledge our lives to the ideals of the United States.
These aren’t just words. They’re practical; they’re our common ground regardless of where we’re from or what political differences we might have. They build trust for cohesion to function amid terrifying and violent circumstances. And these oaths that power American national security will likely be tested in coming years.
During his first administration, Trump threatened use of the Insurrection Act (of 1807). At one point he suggested the military should shoot protesters in the legs, which clearly would have been illegal. More recently, he’s said he would invoke the Alien Enemies Act (of 1798) and may use the military to detain and deport noncitizens. If either order came to pass — for the 1st Armored Division to roll into Cincinnati or the 82nd Airborne to drop on D.C. — it would immediately pose a can’t-fail test for the American military.
What will the troops do? Must members of the U.S. military blindly obey their commander in chief? Or should these individuals always defy orders they consider unconstitutional?
Unfortunately, the answers aren’t straightforward.
The U.S. military oaths counsel thoughtful loyalty, not unthinking fealty — and the law treats each troop as responsible for making the right choice. There’s no respondeat superior (“let the master answer”), no “just following orders” defense, a principle discredited since World War II when the international community held middlemen and foot soldiers responsible for their war crimes that were ordered by Nazi commanders. Thus the military’s first duty is to obey legal orders (and disobey illegal orders). Our generals and JAGs (military lawyers) must lead the institution through the ethical minefields ahead. They, and everyone in camo, must stand their moral ground with courage indistinguishable from the battlefield. Because their oaths expect they “should be prepared not only to die for [their] country, but to be fired for it,” in the words of John Silber.
There’s another bedrock obligation for military members, a principle that has made the uniformed services among the last remaining trusted institutions in the nation. To preserve American democracy as it exists, the armed forces must always remain politically neutral and not side with any politician or party. This is where things get even messier.
If a president ordered the military to shoot protesters, or to become substantially involved with wholesale domestic detentions, what the military must do — obey or defy — depends heavily on the situation’s specifics and any actual violent threat. To issue an advisory opinion without that context would be malpractice. The world is as gray and complex as our oaths are pure and simple.
Because there could be constitutional circumstances for military engagement on U.S. soil. We just can’t know yet whether controversial orders will come, and if so what the situation will be.
What we can know is that the U.S. military is a house with good bones. It’s an institution that’s prepared for dire circumstances like these for quite some time. A century ago, a chaplain at West Point penned the “Cadet Prayer,” which advises: “Make us to choose the harder right instead of the easier wrong.”
Let’s hope that our next president does not attempt to abuse his authority as commander in chief. But if he does, Americans in uniform will choose the harder right — so help us God.
ML Cavanaugh recently retired after 25 years in the U.S. Army. He co-founded the Modern War Institute at West Point. @MLCavanaugh
SAN FRANCISCO — With the California governor’s race quickly approaching, six candidates will face off Wednesday evening in the first debate since former Rep. Eric Swalwell dropped out of the race in the aftermath of sexual assault and misconduct allegations.
The debate takes place at a critical moment in the turbulent contest to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom. Ballots will start landing in Californians’ mailboxes in less than two weeks, and voters are split by a crowded field of eight prominent candidates. The debate also takes place after former state Controller Betty Yee ended her campaign because of a lack of resources and support in the polls.
Two Republicans — Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and conservative commentator Steve Hilton — and four Democrats — billionaire Tom Steyer, former Biden administration Secretary Xavier Becerra, former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter and San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan — will take the stage at Nexstar’s KRON4 studios in San Francisco. Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and state Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, both Democrats, were not invited to participate because of their low polling numbers.
As the candidates strive to distinguish themselves in a crowded field, the debate could include fiery exchanges about the role of money in politics and potential heightened attacks on Becerra, who has surged in the polls since Swalwell dropped out. With the debate taking place on Earth Day, environmental issues are also likely to be raised.
The Wednesday night gathering is the first televised debate in the gubernatorial contest since early February. Last month, USC canceled a debate hours before it was set to begin over mounting criticism that its criteria excluded all major candidates of color.
The 7 p.m. debate is hosted by Nexstar and will be moderated by KTXL FOX40 anchor Nikki Laurenzo and KTLA anchor Frank Buckley. It can be viewed on KRON4 (San Francisco), KTLA5 (Los Angeles), KSWB/KUSI (San Diego), KTXL (Sacramento), KGET (Bakersfield) and KSEE (Fresno). NewsNation will also air the debate.
new video loaded: Virginia Voters Approve New Map Favoring Democrats
By Shawn Paik
April 22, 2026
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Sparks flew on Capitol Hill as Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., accused Federal Reserve nominee Kevin Warsh of being a potential “sock puppet” for President Donald Trump.
Warsh, tapped by Trump in January to lead the Federal Reserve, faced a two-and-a-half-hour confirmation hearing before the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee.
If confirmed, he would take the helm of the world’s most powerful central bank, shaping interest rates, borrowing costs and the financial outlook for millions of American households for the next four years.
WHO IS KEVIN WARSH, TRUMP’S PICK TO SUCCEED JEROME POWELL AS FED CHAIR?
Kevin Warsh, nominee for chairman of the Federal Reserve, listens to ranking member Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., make an opening statement during his Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee confirmation hearing on Tuesday, April 21, 2026. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
In her opening remarks, Warren sharply criticized Warsh’s record and questioned his independence, arguing he is “uniquely ill-suited for the job as Fed chair” and warning he could give Trump influence over the central bank.
She accused Warsh of enabling Wall Street during the 2008 financial crisis, which fell during his tenure as a Federal Reserve governor when he served from 2006 to 2011.
“In our meeting last week, we discussed the 2008 financial crash, where 8 million people lost their jobs, 10 million people lost their homes and millions more lost their life savings,” Warren said. “Giant banks, however, got hundreds of billions of dollars in bailouts… and he said to me that he has no regrets about anything he did.”
She added that Warsh “worked tirelessly to arrange multibillion-dollar bailouts” for Wall Street CEOs, with nothing for American families.
The hearing grew more tense as Warren pivoted to ethics concerns, pressing Warsh over his undisclosed financial holdings and questioning him over links to business dealings connected to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
The two spoke over each other and raised their voices in a heated exchange on Capitol Hill.
WARSH’S $226 MILLION FORTUNE UNDER SCRUTINY AS FED NOMINEE FACES SENATE CONFIRMATION
Sen. Elizabeth Warren: The Fed has been plagued by deeply disturbing ethics scandals in recent years. It’s critical that the next chair have no financial conflicts — none. You have more than $100 million in investments that you have refused to disclose. So let me ask: do the Juggernaut Fund or THSDFS LLC invest in companies affiliated with President Trump or his family, companies tied to money laundering, Chinese-controlled firms, or financing vehicles linked to Jeffrey Epstein?
Kevin Warsh: Senator, I’ve worked closely with the Office of Government Ethics and agreed to divest all of my financial assets.
Warren: Could you answer my question, please? You have more than $100 million in undisclosed assets. Are any of those investments tied to the entities I just mentioned? It’s a yes-or-no question.
Warsh: I have worked tirelessly with ethics officials and agreed to sell all of my assets before taking the oath of office.
Warren: Are you refusing to tell us if you have investments in vehicles linked to Jeffrey Epstein? You just won’t say?
Warsh: What I’m telling you is those assets will be sold if I’m confirmed.
Warren: Will you disclose how you plan to divest these assets? The public might question your motives if, for example, someone who profits from predicting Fed policy cuts you a $100 million check as you take office.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren questions Kevin Warsh during his Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee confirmation hearing on Tuesday, April 21, 2026. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
Warsh: I’ve reached a full agreement with the Office of Government Ethics and will divest those assets before taking the oath.
Warren: I’m asking a very straightforward question. Will you disclose how you divest those assets?
Warsh: As I’ve said, I’ve worked with ethics officials.
Warren: I’ll take that as a no.
In a separate exchange, Warren invoked Trump’s past statements about the Fed and challenged Warsh to prove his independence in real time.
She insisted that Warsh answer whether he believes Trump won the 2020 presidential election and if he would name policies of the president with which he disagrees. The hopeful future Fed chair dodged the question and said he would remain apolitical, if confirmed.
THE ONE LINE IN WARSH’S TESTIMONY SIGNALING A BREAK FROM THE FED’S STATUS QUO
Warren: Donald Trump has made clear he does not want an independent Fed. He has said, “Anybody that disagrees with me will never be Fed chairman.” He’s also said interest rates will drop “when Kevin gets in.” Let’s check out your independence and your courage. We’ll start easy. Mr. Warsh, did Donald Trump lose the 2020 election?
Warsh: Senator, we should keep politics out of the Federal Reserve.
Warren: I’m asking a factual question.
Warsh: This body certified the election.
Warren: That’s not what I asked. Did Donald Trump lose in 2020?
Warsh: The Fed should stay out of politics.
Warren: In our meeting, you said you’re a “tough guy” who can stand up to President Trump. So name one aspect of his economic agenda you disagree with.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Kevin Warsh listens to a question during a Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee confirmation hearing on Tuesday, April 21, 2026. (Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Warsh: That’s not something I’m prepared to do. The Fed should stay in its lane.
Warren: Just one place where you disagree.
Warsh: I do have one disagreement — he said I looked like I was out of central casting. I think I’d look older and grayer.
Warren: That’s adorable. But we need a Fed chair who is independent. If you can’t answer these questions, you don’t have the courage or the independence.
-
Sports6 minutes agoTrump envoy asks FIFA to replace Iran with Italy in 2026 World Cup: report
-
Technology12 minutes agoBooking.com data breach exposes traveler data to scams
-
Business18 minutes agoAngry Altadena residents ask officials to halt Edison’s undergrounding work
-
Entertainment24 minutes ago‘Clayface’ trailer teases DC Studios’ first proper horror movie
-
Lifestyle30 minutes agoShe built a following of plus-size customers. Why is she closing her L.A. resale shop?
-
Politics36 minutes ago
As primary election nears, top candidates for California governor debate tonight
-
Science42 minutes ago44% of Americans breathe dangerously polluted air. In California, it’s 82%
-
Sports48 minutes agoKings’ close playoff losses to Avalanche stoke confidence and frustration