September 17, 2025 / 6:36 PM EDT
/ CBS News
The Pentagon has been looking through dozens of social media posts that appear to come from U.S. service members in the wake of conservative political activist Charlie Kirk’s assassination, brought to the military’s attention through various means. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has publicly warned against any commentary mocking or praising his killing.
In a post on X, he said of anti-Kirk posts, “We are tracking all these very closely — and will address, immediately. Completely unacceptable.”
Already, at least one Marine officer has been pulled from recruiting duties pending an investigation into his post, and five Army officers and an Army reserve officer have been suspended while their social media posts are under review, service officials said.
It’s unclear how many service members across the military branches are being investigated over remarks related to Kirk. Some service members have been targeted online for even quoting statements Kirk made in the past.
Current and former service members, some congressional members, including GOP Rep. Derrick Van Orden of Wisconsin, and social media accounts like the far right Libs of TikTok, which has over 4 million followers on X, and Mostly Peaceful Memes, have been publicly flagging posts and tagging the Defense Department for review since last week.
But defense officials said consequences would vary, depending not only on the substance of the comments but also on whether the author is a civilian employee or a uniformed service member. While civilians retain broad free speech protections, service members operate under tighter limits governed by service directives and Uniform Code of Military Justice.
For instance, service members could face disciplinary measures for violating Article 92 of the code, which simply requires them to follow regulations, or Article 134, which prohibits conduct discrediting the armed forces.
“It’s very easy to frame commentary — even somewhat benign commentary — about Charlie Kirk as somehow a violation of the UCMJ,” said Dan Maurer, a retired Army lieutenant colonel and former military prosecutor who now focuses on national security and criminal law at Ohio Northern University’s College of Law.
Maurer told CBS News,”The way that those laws are so broadly written, and given the reaction from the secretary of defense and from the president about people who comment at all about Charlie Kirk, it’s entirely foreseeable that it will be at least threatened to be used.”
But proving a service member violated the UCMJ in a court martial could be challenging. Prosecutors, Maurer said, would have to show the posts are inciting violence or would be prejudicial to good order and discipline.
In a 2008 case involving an Army soldier, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, the highest appellate court in the nation’s military justice system, found that a soldier expressing white supremacist views online was not a violation of Article 134, even under the “less protective First Amendment right afforded to servicemembers, and despite the offensive nature of [the solder’s] views and communications.”
The court found that for speech to be prejudiced against good order and discipline, it had to have a “direct and palpable effect on the military mission or environment.” The court said the speech in the 2008 case was different from other cases because it was not directed at military members, his unit, or an expression of military policy and there was no impact on “good order and discipline,” and it was not “service discrediting.”
There are also non-judicial ways to discipline troops, like letters of reprimand that could affect career advancement, or result in loss of pay or rank.
When asked how many service members are under investigation, the Pentagon on Monday referred CBS News to each of the service branches.
“We will not tolerate military or civilian personnel who celebrate or mock the assassination of a fellow American,” chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said in a statement.
“Those in our ranks who rejoice at an act of domestic terrorism are unfit to serve the American people at the Department of War.”
Army Secretary Dan Driscoll told reporters on Wednesday he didn’t have an estimate for how many posts are under review.
“On a one-by-one basis, the Army is taking those very seriously and the command and the units are looking into each specific instance of that, and they’ll take appropriate action,” Driscoll said.
It echoed his statement on X last week: “Posts that celebrate or mock the assassination of a fellow American are inconsistent with Army values.”
The other two service secretaries, Navy Secretary John Phelan and Air Force Secretary Troy E. Meink, similarly posted last week on X about content related to Kirk.
Phelan said in his post that “any uniformed or civilian employee of the Department of the Navy who acts in a manner that brings discredit upon the Department, the @USNavy or the @USMC will be dealt with swiftly and decisively,” and Meink in his post said, “Airmen and Guardians are expected to uphold the highest standards of professionalism and conduct at all times.”
Eleanor Watson is a CBS News multi-platform reporter and producer covering the Pentagon.
The post Pentagon reviewing service members’ social media posts on Charlie Kirk appeared first on CBS News.
