A D.C. grand jury’s unanimous rejection of politically motivated charges against six military-veteran Democrat lawmakers has exposed the dangerous limits of weaponizing federal prosecution against Americans exercising their First Amendment rights.
Story Snapshot
- Grand jury unanimously rejected federal indictment attempts against six Democrat lawmakers who advised military personnel to refuse illegal orders
- Trump-appointed U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro drops prosecution efforts after rare grand jury pushback signals politicized case
- Lawmakers—all military or intelligence veterans—vindicated after the administration pursued decade-long federal charges for protected speech
- Case highlights critical concerns about DOJ weaponization and First Amendment protections under executive pressure
Grand Jury Rejects Politically Driven Indictment
In early February 2026, a Washington, D.C. grand jury unanimously rejected federal prosecutors’ attempt to indict six Democrat lawmakers under 18 U.S.C. § 2387, a statute prohibiting incitement of military insubordination.
The lawmakers—Senators Elissa Slotkin and Mark Kelly, along with Representatives Jason Crow, Chrissy Houlahan, Maggie Goodlander, and Chris Deluzio—released a 90-second video in late November 2025 reminding military and intelligence personnel of their duty to refuse unlawful orders.
The grand jury’s finding of no probable cause represents a historically rare unanimous rejection, signaling the weakness of the government’s case and raising serious questions about prosecutorial overreach.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington, D.C., led by Jeanine Pirro, had sought to indict lawmakers two weeks ago, but a federal grand jury issued a rare denial. Pirro has subsequently decided to stop pursuing the case. https://t.co/IotFC73ngV pic.twitter.com/IqjEDTCvqT
— The New Republic (@newrepublic) February 24, 2026
Military Veterans Defend Constitutional Duty
All six targeted lawmakers bring extensive military or intelligence credentials: Slotkin served as a CIA analyst, Kelly flew combat missions as a Navy pilot and astronaut, and the House members are Army and Air Force veterans. Their video emphasized long-standing military law principles rooted in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which requires service members to disobey illegal commands.
The video emerged during the Trump administration’s policies, including National Guard deployments in Democrat cities and lethal force authorizations against drug-smuggling vessels. These lawmakers weren’t encouraging rebellion—they were reinforcing constitutional obligations that protect both service members and citizens from government overreach.
Trump Administration Pushes Failed Prosecution
President Trump publicly labeled the lawmakers “traitors” on social media immediately after the video’s release, demanding they be “locked up.” U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, a Trump appointee, abruptly directed her office in mid-January 2026 to pursue grand jury indictments carrying potential 10-year prison sentences.
Politically hired attorneys led the prosecution effort despite the lawmakers simply quoting established law. The attempted indictment fits a troubling pattern where the administration has called for prosecutions of perceived opponents including Letitia James, James Comey, and Adam Schiff. This case, however, met unprecedented pushback from a D.C. grand jury increasingly skeptical of retribution-driven prosecutions.
Implications for Free Speech and Federal Power
Pirro’s office has now ended prosecution efforts following the grand jury’s rejection, though uncertainty remains whether other federal districts might attempt charges. The lawmakers celebrated the outcome: Kelly decried the “abuse of power,” while Slotkin emphasized the rule of law prevailing.
Attorney Abbe Lowell, representing Representative Crow, issued warning letters about the potential ramifications of the prosecution attempt. This case underscores critical concerns for conservatives who value constitutional limits on government power.
While the Trump administration rightfully deserves support for many policies reversing Biden-era damage, weaponizing federal prosecution against protected political speech—even from opponents—threatens the First Amendment protections all Americans rely upon. The grand jury’s decisive rejection serves as a vital check on executive overreach, demonstrating that constitutional principles must transcend partisan advantage.
Sources:
Report: Pirro ending push to prosecute six Democrats after grand jury rejects charges – KATV
