“The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.”
– Dick the Butcher, Henry VI, Part 2, by William Shakespeare
This article is meant to be apolitical. Regardless of your political leaning, I hope you will find it worth reading.
In a former life, I served four years on active duty as an officer in the United States Marine Corps. My MOS (or Military Occupational Specialty) was 4402, Judge Advocate. I was stationed at the Marine Corps Air-Ground Combat Center in Twentynine Palms, California, and for the last 18 months of my tour of duty, I served as the Senior Defense Counsel on the base. One of my biggest cases allowed me to represent Marines accused of violating Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, namely, “failure to obey a lawful order.”
Given that line item in my professional resume, I was completely embarrassed when I discovered this morning that I had completely failed to anticipate the most recent move by President Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth.
If you are a critic of President Trump, then this move should terrify you, especially since it is perfectly legal. If you are a supporter of President Trump, then you should be proud of this incredibly brilliant move. I am neither and both, but I can say that someone in the Administration is definitely playing three-dimensional chess.
MILITARY MUSICAL CHAIRS
Yesterday, President Trump and Secretary Hegseth announced some personnel changes at the highest levels of the United States military.
These included a replacement for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who is the most senior military advisor, and the Chief of Naval Operations, who is the most senior operational officer in the Navy. Buried in the same news story was the fact that Hegseth requested nominations to replace the Judge Advocates General for the Army, Navy, and Air Force (with no mention on whether a similar course of action will be taken with the Marine Corps, Space Force, and Coast Guard).
As a former Marine Judge Advocate, this last item caught my attention.
First, I always have to remind myself that the U.S. President effectively wears two hats: chief executive of the government and commander-in-chief of the armed forces. For the former, he is basically a civilian operating within a civilian paradigm. However, for the latter, he is the most senior person in the military chain of command and therefore operates within a military paradigm. There are huge differences.
Most importantly, everyone in the military serves “at the pleasure of the President” and can be replaced at any time for any reason. As far as I can tell, every action President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have taken are both legal and also perfectly within their purview, regardless of how unprecedented they may be.
Honestly, I do not think that anyone was surprised by the removal of top commanding officers, since even during President Trump’s first term he was critical of generals who disagreed with him. After all, it makes perfect sense that the commander-in-chief would want to have senior leaders who he can trust to carry out his orders.
Unlike with his civilian role, where some leaders may tolerate and even encourage subordinates to challenge his decisions, the commander-in-chief needs to ensure a unified front. This is critical for outward appearances to our adversaries and for inward morale of our troops. Yes, there is a time and place for soliciting alternative courses of action, but once the commander makes a decision and issues an order, full compliance is absolutely essential.
SHUFFLING TOP LAWYERS
As much as I anticipated that President Trump would ensure that the top generals and admirals would be officers he could trust, I was completely blindsided by the anticipated reshuffling of the top military lawyers. Again, I am embarrassed, because this move makes so much sense that I should have seen it coming months ago.
After all, one situation that both sides of the political spectrum fear during President Trump’s second term is that circumstances may arise where he may give an order to his top officers that some people may find questionable. One side fears that the officers will refuse to execute the order, while the other fears that they will comply. Either way, over the next four years our top military commanders may find themselves in complicated positions where they will have to make incredibly difficult decisions.
Should those situations arise, the commanders will likely solicit advice from various experts, and one of the most valuable may be the top lawyers in their branch of service. The legal opinions of the several Judge Advocates General may carry significant weight in persuading the commanding officers one way or another on how to act upon any particular order.
And this is why yesterday’s announcement makes perfect sense.
Not only are the President and Secretary preparing for potentially contentious situations by putting in place military leaders who tend to agree with them, but also they are likely putting in place top legal advisors who will do the same.
WHAT NEXT?
I started this article with one of Shakespeare’s most famous quotes. Taken in context, he was holding up lawyers as the protectors of the rule of law, who were the first line of defense against conspirators trying to overthrow the government. Alternatively, some people interpret this as a call to eliminate the lead oppressors for a corrupt government.
Again, depending on your political leanings, you should see these latest moves by the President and Secretary as either terrifying or brilliant. Only time will tell how this all plays out.
**********************
