Court issues injunction preventing Hegseth from demoting Senator Kelly

P

Poor Richard Saunders

Well-known member
Contributor
On Wednesday a Federal court issued an injunction preventing Pete Hegseth from sanctioning Senator Kelly when it comes to his first amendment rights.


United States Senator Mark Kelly, a retired naval officer, has been censured by
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth for voicing certain opinions on military actions and
policy. In addition, he has been subjected to proceedings to possibly reduce his retirement
rank and pay and threatened with criminal prosecution if he continues to speak out on these
issues. Secretary Hegseth relies on the well-established doctrine that military
service members enjoy less vigorous First Amendment protections given the fundamental
obligation for obedience and discipline in the armed forces. Unfortunately for Secretary
Hegseth, no court has ever extended those principles to retired service members, much less
a retired servicemember serving in Congress and exercising oversight responsibility over
the military. This Court will not be the first to do so!
This Court has all it needs
to conclude that Defendants have trampled on Senator Kelly's First Amendment freedoms
and threatened the constitutional liberties of millions of military retirees. After all, as Bob
Dylan famously said, "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows."1
To say the least, our retired veterans deserve more respect from their Government, and our
Constitution demands they receive it!

[snip]

CONCLUSION
Rather than trying to shrink the First Amendment liberties of retired
servicemembers, Secretary Hegseth and his fellow Defendants might reflect and be grateful
for the wisdom and expertise that retired servicemembers have brought to public
discussions and debate on military matters in our Nation over the past 250 years. If so,
they will more fully appreciate why the Founding Fathers made free speech the first
Amendment in the Bill of Rights! Hopefully this injunction will in some small way help
bring about a course correction in the Defense Department's approach to these issues.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
On Wednesday a Federal court issued an injunction preventing Pete Hegseth from sanctioning Senator Kelly when it comes to his first amendment rights.


United States Senator Mark Kelly, a retired naval officer, has been censured by
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth for voicing certain opinions on military actions and
policy. In addition, he has been subjected to proceedings to possibly reduce his retirement
rank and pay and threatened with criminal prosecution if he continues to speak out on these
issues. Secretary Hegseth relies on the well-established doctrine that military
service members enjoy less vigorous First Amendment protections given the fundamental
obligation for obedience and discipline in the armed forces. Unfortunately for Secretary
Hegseth, no court has ever extended those principles to retired service members, much less
a retired servicemember serving in Congress and exercising oversight responsibility over
the military. This Court will not be the first to do so!
This Court has all it needs
to conclude that Defendants have trampled on Senator Kelly's First Amendment freedoms
and threatened the constitutional liberties of millions of military retirees. After all, as Bob
Dylan famously said, "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows."1
To say the least, our retired veterans deserve more respect from their Government, and our
Constitution demands they receive it!

[snip]

CONCLUSION
Rather than trying to shrink the First Amendment liberties of retired
servicemembers, Secretary Hegseth and his fellow Defendants might reflect and be grateful
for the wisdom and expertise that retired servicemembers have brought to public
discussions and debate on military matters in our Nation over the past 250 years. If so,
they will more fully appreciate why the Founding Fathers made free speech the first
Amendment in the Bill of Rights! Hopefully this injunction will in some small way help
bring about a course correction in the Defense Department's approach to these issues.
Click to expand...
1771190876948.png
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
You still haven't bothered to read the ruling, have you?

Does being in a cult like you are mean you are unable to read? Why do you think retired military have no first amendment rights?
Click to expand...
Doesn't matter. Federal judges shouldn't be involving themselves in military affairs or politics. They should stick to legal matters and ruling as the laws are written.

Retired military in matters that concern the military are still first and foremost something for the military to determine. The federal courts are a last, not first, resort in such matters.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
On Wednesday a Federal court issued an injunction preventing Pete Hegseth from sanctioning Senator Kelly when it comes to his first amendment rights.


United States Senator Mark Kelly, a retired naval officer, has been censured by
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth for voicing certain opinions on military actions and
policy. In addition, he has been subjected to proceedings to possibly reduce his retirement
rank and pay and threatened with criminal prosecution if he continues to speak out on these
issues. Secretary Hegseth relies on the well-established doctrine that military
service members enjoy less vigorous First Amendment protections given the fundamental
obligation for obedience and discipline in the armed forces. Unfortunately for Secretary
Hegseth, no court has ever extended those principles to retired service members, much less
a retired servicemember serving in Congress and exercising oversight responsibility over
the military. This Court will not be the first to do so!
This Court has all it needs
to conclude that Defendants have trampled on Senator Kelly's First Amendment freedoms
and threatened the constitutional liberties of millions of military retirees. After all, as Bob
Dylan famously said, "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows."1
To say the least, our retired veterans deserve more respect from their Government, and our
Constitution demands they receive it!

[snip]

CONCLUSION
Rather than trying to shrink the First Amendment liberties of retired
servicemembers, Secretary Hegseth and his fellow Defendants might reflect and be grateful
for the wisdom and expertise that retired servicemembers have brought to public
discussions and debate on military matters in our Nation over the past 250 years. If so,
they will more fully appreciate why the Founding Fathers made free speech the first
Amendment in the Bill of Rights! Hopefully this injunction will in some small way help
bring about a course correction in the Defense Department's approach to these issues.
Click to expand...
More judicial activism
 
QP! said:
When it comes to adherence to the Constitution and laws, yes, yes they do.

It would be fascist to think otherwise.
Click to expand...
The military was made something of an exception in this with the UCMJ and military law. It was seen, even by the founders, that the military is a unique entity in society and in order to function effectively must have a unique set of rules applied to it.
 
Yakuda said:
More judicial activism
Click to expand...
akachx.jpg
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Doesn't matter. Federal judges shouldn't be involving themselves in military affairs or politics. They should stick to legal matters and ruling as the laws are written.
Click to expand...
Once again, you decide to show us you either can't read or don't understand that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Violations of the first amendment by the government IS a legal matter.

T. A. Gardner said:
Retired military in matters that concern the military are still first and foremost something for the military to determine. The federal courts are a last, not first, resort in such matters.
Click to expand...
Retired military are NOT in the military. Then by your idiotic argument, no retired military could serve in Congress or vote on funding for the military or vote to confirm the defense secretary or vote to promote any officer in the military. Retired military are civilians.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
Once again, you decide to show us you either can't read or don't understand that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Violations of the first amendment by the government IS a legal matter.
Click to expand...
Poor Richard Saunders said:
Retired military are NOT in the military. Then by your idiotic argument, no retired military could serve in Congress or vote on funding for the military or vote to confirm the defense secretary or vote to promote any officer in the military. Retired military are civilians.
Click to expand...
Technically, officers are. Enlisted aren't past 65, but officers are subject to recall to active duty as they remain commissioned. Commissioned and enlisted can serve in Congress as Senator John Tower proves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top