Secretary of War Pete Hegseth on Sunday suggested Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., may have violated his oath with comments he made to a news outlet following a classified briefing.

Kelly told Margaret Brennan on Face the Nation that it is “shocking how deep we have gone into these magazines” when asked if the Pentagon has updated lawmakers on the Iran war’s impact on U.S. weapons stockpiles. 

The senator told Brennan the Tomahawks, Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS), RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 (SM-3), Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) rounds and Patriot rounds used to defend the U.S. have been hit hard, adding that it will take years to replenish those stockpiles, which could affect a hypothetical U.S. conflict with China.

In response, Hegseth questioned whether Kelly, a former Navy pilot, may have violated his oath and said the Pentagon’s legal counsel will review his comments.

FEDERAL JUDGE BLOCKS PENTAGON FROM DEMOTING MARK KELLY OVER CONTROVERSIAL MILITARY VIDEO

“‘Captain’ Mark Kelly strikes again,” Hegseth wrote on X.

“Now he’s blabbing on TV (falsely & dumbly) about a *CLASSIFIED* Pentagon briefing he received,” he continued. “Did he violate his oath… again? @DeptofWar legal counsel will review.”

The senator clapped back, saying Hegseth had revealed similar information at a recent hearing and that it was not classified.

“We had this conversation in a public hearing a week ago and you said it would take ‘years’ to replenish some of these stockpiles,” Kelly responded on X. “That’s not classified, it’s a quote from you. This war is coming at a serious cost and you and the president still haven’t explained to the American people what the goal is.”

This comes amid a months-long dispute between Hegseth and Kelly over the senator’s participation in a video with some of his Democratic colleagues in Congress urging U.S. military members to ignore “illegal” orders.

The DOJ has opened an investigation into the video posted online featuring six Democratic lawmakers calling on troops and members of the intelligence community to defy illegal orders from the federal government. The lawmakers all served in the military or at intelligence agencies.

In addition to Kelly, the other lawmakers in the video were Sens. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, as well as Reps. Chris Deluzio and Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire and Jason Crow of Colorado.

GRAND JURY REJECTS DOJ EFFORT TO INDICT DEMOCRATIC LAWMAKERS WHO URGED MILITARY TO DEFY ILLEGAL ORDERS

“This administration is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens,” the lawmakers said in the video. “Like us, you all swore an oath to protect and defend this Constitution. Right now, the threats coming to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad but from right here at home. Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders. No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution.”

Grand jurors declined to sign off on charges against the lawmakers in February.

In November, the Pentagon launched an investigation into Kelly, pointing to a federal law that allows retired service members to be recalled to active duty on orders of the secretary for possible court-martial or other punishment.

Hegseth has censured Kelly and has attempted to retroactively demote him from his retired rank of captain over his participation in the video, which affirms that refusing unlawful orders is a standard part of military protocol.

But a federal court ruling blocked the Pentagon from demoting the lawmaker over the video. The court also found the Pentagon likely violated Kelly’s First Amendment rights, and those of “millions of military retirees,” when it formally censured him on Jan. 5.

Hegseth subsequently appealed that ruling.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Last week, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit heard oral arguments and appeared largely skeptical of Hegseth’s attempt to punish Kelly for the video.

“I will not back down from this fight,” Kelly said after the hearing.

President Donald Trump had accused the lawmakers of being “traitors” who engaged in “sedition at the highest level” and “should be in jail” after the video was posted last fall. He even suggested they should be executed over the video, although he later attempted to walk that comment back.

Slotkin, who previously worked at the CIA and Pentagon, was targeted with a bomb threat just days after the clip and Trump’s subsequent statements suggesting the Democrats be executed.

Voters in California may get a chance to remake the state’s open primary system in two years.

Political consultant Steve Maviglio filed an application Friday with state officials that seeks to alter California’s voting system by reverting to a traditional primary. Under the proposal, the top candidates from each party would advance to the general election in November.

The current system allows the top two candidates, regardless of party, to move on to the runoff. That has led to instances in which two Democrats or two Republicans have faced off in the general election.

The state’s gubernatorial election, for example, has prompted concern that two Republicans could shut out the Democratic candidates. Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and former Fox News commentator Steve Hilton have polled high in various surveys and are facing a large field of Democrats.

Democratic voters vastly outnumber Republicans in California, yet some political consultants said they feared there were so many Democrats running that voters wouldn’t coalesce around one candidate and the field would be split. Those fears have eased somewhat in recent months as some Democratic candidates advance from the pack.

The state’s top-two primary system has been in place since California voters passed Proposition 14 in 2010. The state’s major political parties opposed the initiative, while Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger supported it.

The goal was to help end partisan gridlock in Sacramento and force candidates in primaries to appeal to a wider range of voters, rather than just those in their own party.

Proposition 14, as well as the state’s once-a-decade redistricting process, has led to some dramatic races, including the 2012 face-off between Democratic Reps. Brad Sherman and Howard Berman for a congressional seat in Los Angeles’ San Fernando Valley. Amid aspersions and attack ads, the pair nearly came to blows at a community debate.

Maviglio described the ballot measure as a simple repeal of Proposition 14, and said he was inspired by the governor’s race.

“It was extremely scary to envision the November ballot for governor with Republicans on it,” Maviglio said.

The New York Times first reported on the ballot measure proposal.

A news release from Maviglio states that the proposed repeal of Prop. 14 “is fueled by concerns that California’s primaries are disenfranchising a majority of California voters by limiting choice to candidates from one party.”

A website for the effort includes criticisms of the current primary system by Democratic Party Chair Rusty Hicks and Ron Nehring, former chairman of the California Republican Party.

Maviglio’s ballot initiative proposes to appear on the 2028 ballot and take effect in 2030.

Talk of changing Proposition 14 has been swirling in Sacramento for months.

Secretary of State Shirley Weber told reporters at an unrelated news conference last week that she had voted years ago against Proposition 14. She questioned whether it had actually succeeded in creating more diversity.

“I did not like the open primary,” Weber said. “I didn’t think it would solve any problems. They had a list of problems it would solve, and none of those have been solved.”