Listen to the article
Democratic Lawmakers Threaten Legal Action Against Trump Administration Following Failed DOJ Probe
Six Democratic lawmakers who urged U.S. service members to “refuse illegal orders” are now threatening legal action against the Trump administration over what they describe as a weaponization of the Department of Justice.
The confrontation intensified Wednesday when four House Democrats—Reps. Jason Crow (D-Colo.), Maggie Goodlander (D-N.H.), Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.), and Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.)—revealed plans to pursue legal recourse after a grand jury declined to indict them on Tuesday evening.
“Yesterday, the Trump Department of Justice tried and failed to indict us on criminal charges based on a video that we filmed last year simply reminding our fellow service members to follow the law and the Constitution,” Crow stated. “They failed, and they will always fail.”
In a direct warning to the administration, Crow added, “We are taking names. We are creating lists. My lawyers just sent a letter today to the Department of Justice, putting them on notice that there will be costs.” He did not elaborate on specific legal actions being considered.
The controversy stems from a video released by the group of military veteran Democrats in November 2025. In the recording, they urged service members to disregard commands that violated the Constitution, stating: “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.”
The lawmakers emphasized in their message, “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.”
The Department of Justice responded by launching an investigation into whether these statements constituted sedition. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth referred to the group as the “Seditious Six” during the controversy.
After the grand jury rejected the DOJ’s efforts to secure indictments, Democratic senators who also appeared in the video joined their House colleagues in condemning the probe. Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) called the situation “outrageous” and warned about systemic damage.
“This is not a good news story,” Kelly said. “This is a story about how Donald Trump and his cronies are trying to break our system in order to silence anyone who lawfully speaks out against them.”
Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), another participant in the video, expressed similar concerns about the administration’s approach to dissent. “The president has used our justice system to weaponize it against his perceived enemies,” she said. “I think that we’ve come to a really sad moment in America, where the paradigm of leadership has become completely reversed in 2026.”
When asked how to distinguish between legitimate law enforcement and political prosecution, Rep. Crow pointed to President Trump’s own statements. “I’ve learned to take Donald Trump’s words and to listen to him,” Crow said. “He actually came right out and said what he thought about this and said this is because he wants to silence political opposition.”
The confrontation has been further inflamed by Trump’s characterization of the lawmakers as “traitors” who engaged in “sedition at the highest level” and “should be in jail.” At one point, the president even suggested they should face execution, though he later walked back those comments.
This clash highlights growing tensions between the legislative and executive branches under the Trump administration, with significant implications for military-civilian relations and constitutional interpretation. Civil liberties organizations have been closely monitoring the case, noting the precedent it could set for political speech by former military officers now serving in Congress.
Crow declined to provide a timeline for potential legal action, suggesting the next move depends on the administration’s response. “That’s actually a ball that’s in the Trump administration’s court,” he said. “We’ve been very clear about our position and that it needs to stop. If it doesn’t stop, then we’ll take all necessary actions.”
The Department of Justice has not yet responded to requests for comment on the threatened legal action.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
12 Comments
The mining and energy sectors are closely watched for any political developments that could impact commodity prices and industry regulations. This dispute seems to have broader implications beyond just the individuals involved.
That’s a fair observation. The outcome of this case could set precedents that affect how the government interacts with the private sector, including industries like mining and energy. It’s an important story to follow.
This certainly seems like a politically charged situation. I’m curious to see how the legal battle unfolds between the lawmakers and the Trump administration. There appear to be valid concerns on both sides that will need to be carefully considered.
You raise a good point. This has the potential to become quite a complex legal case with a lot of nuance involved. It will be important for both parties to make their cases objectively and avoid further escalation.
I’m interested to learn more about the specific legal arguments being made by the lawmakers. Threatening legal action is a serious step, so I imagine they feel they have a strong case against the DOJ’s actions.
Agreed, the lawmakers must believe they have a solid legal foundation to take this stance. It will be crucial for both sides to make their cases clearly and transparently as this plays out.
This dispute highlights the complex and sometimes contentious relationship between the federal government and private industries, especially in sectors like mining and energy that are heavily regulated. I’ll be watching to see how it unfolds.
That’s a good point. The balance of power and oversight between government and industry is an ongoing challenge, and cases like this can help shape those dynamics going forward.
This is a complex situation that touches on important issues of separation of powers, government accountability, and the rights of private citizens and businesses. I’ll be following this story closely to see how it develops.
Well said. This case has the potential to impact a range of industries, not just mining and energy. The balance between government authority and individual/corporate rights is an ongoing challenge that warrants careful consideration.
The threat of legal action from these lawmakers seems like a bold move. I’m curious to understand the specific grounds they believe they have to challenge the DOJ’s actions. This could set an important precedent.
Absolutely, the legal arguments made by both sides will be crucial in determining the outcome. It will be interesting to see if this case establishes any new boundaries or principles regarding government oversight of private entities.