President Trump’s decision to fire senior military leaders without cause is foolish and a disgrace. It politicizes our professional military in a dangerous and debilitating way. What frightens me even more is the removal of three judge advocates general, the most senior uniformed legal authorities in the Defense Department. Their removal is one more element of this administration’s attack on the rule of law, and an especially disturbing part.
Let us start with the senior officers. As secretary of the Air Force in the Biden administration, I worked closely with Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. for two years when he was chief of staff of the Air Force, and for more than a year when he was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In my entire 55 years of working in national security in many capacities, I have never known a steadier, wiser and more professional, patriotic or honorable officer than C.Q. Brown. Gen. James Slife and Adm. Lisa Franchetti are also extremely capable and professional officers whom I know well and deeply admire. They served for decades with honor and distinction over many administrations.
It pains me to see these fine people being treated so unfairly and, for the first time in my career, to see dedicated, apolitical military professionals being removed without cause. I am worried about political loyalty becoming a criterion to hold high military positions. For now, I have confidence that our professional military has nurtured dozens of highly qualified senior officers capable of holding positions of trust and responsibility, people who can provide leadership at the Pentagon and offer sound military advice to our civilian leaders.
But that optimism doesn’t extend to the consequences of removing the military’s top judge advocates general, the senior military professionals who interpret and enforce the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the rules that guide troops in the field. They have the independent legal authority to tell any military commander or political appointee that an order from the president or the secretary of defense is unlawful, cannot be given and should not be obeyed.
Of the three JAGs who were dismissed, I know Lt. Gen. Charles Plummer and worked with him for more than three years. His legal advice was always sound, professional and well supported. It is hard to imagine there was any reason to remove him, other than the obvious one of replacing him with someone more loyal to Mr. Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth — and therefore more willing to interpret the law consistent with their desires.
If there is one characteristic of this president and this administration, it is the utter lack of respect for legal constraints. Mr. Trump has been clear about his views. Among many examples, he recently wrote, “He who saves his country does not violate any law.” It is clear from Mr. Hegseth’s confirmation hearing, public appearances, writings and support for convicted war criminals that he also does not believe JAG officers should constrain war fighters — or presumably the president and secretary of defense.
Mr. Trump and Mr. Hegseth will now get to choose the JAG leadership for all three military departments. One has to ask why JAG leadership was singled out for replacement. This is part of a much larger pattern of disrespect, even disdain, for the rule of law. We do not need JAG leaders who fit this pattern.
One of the most admirable characteristics of the American military is that all serving members are trained to understand that America stands for more than naked self-interest. Above all, it stands up for the Constitution and the rule of law, including the laws of armed conflict and those that restrict the use of the military against American citizens. Undermining those core principles is a disservice to our men and women in uniform and to everything America has stood for throughout my life. We are in danger when the legal constraints on how the president uses the military, including within the United States, are ignored or brushed aside.
My experiences with our JAG officers have always been positive. One stands out in particular. Years ago, I was an observer for the nonprofit organization Human Rights First at a legal proceeding for a detainee held at the military facility at Guantánamo Bay. In a briefing to observers and the media, the lead JAG defense attorney made a statement to the following effect: Whoever set up this prosecution system assumed that there would be quick trials with no meaningful defense by the assigned JAG officers. Those people did not understand JAG lawyers. We will support the rule of law and defend our clients, whomever they are.
I have never been prouder to be an American than I was in that moment. We will see if the new JAG leadership lives up to this standard.
Our country is in uncharted territory. We have an administration that is waging war against the rule of law. The evidence is everywhere. We don’t yet know how far it will go as it seeks to control, reinterpret, rewrite, ignore or defy legal constraints, including the Constitution itself. The replacement of the military JAG leadership is one skirmish in that war, but it’s time for the American people, across the political spectrum, to recognize what is happening. America has a rogue president and a rogue administration, and we need to acknowledge that and respond.
The post America Has a Rogue President appeared first on New York Times.
