Sherrill, Slotkin Ask Senior Leaders to Reinforce Limits on Military’s Role in Domestic Affairs

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Reps. Mikie Sherrill (NJ-11) and Elissa Slotkin (MI-07) this week wrote to senior military leaders including Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General C.Q. Brown, asking them to reiterate constitutional use of active duty military forces on U.S. soil.

Sherrill, a former U.S. Navy helicopter pilot and federal prosecutor, and Slotkin, a former CIA officer and senior Pentagon official, wrote their letter in the wake of comments and proposals put forth by political candidates and laid out in the controversial Project 2025 that propose the unconstitutional use of American troops in instances of protest or to enforce domestic laws.

“There is no greater responsibility than the oath of office we swear to the Constitution, not to a president or political party,” said Sherrill. “Donald Trump betrayed that oath time and again, particularly on January 6 when he jeopardized the peaceful transfer of power. As we prepare for another presidential election, we are calling on our military leaders to reject improper political influence and to take necessary steps to preserve the bedrock foundation of our democracy.”

“In 2020, when the former President and others disrupted the peaceful transfer of power, principled military leaders made it clear they would not help that effort and took an important stand for democracy,” said Slotkin. “Now, prominent leaders are once again declaring that if given a chance, they will use the military for their own political ends, threatening centuries of commitment to keeping our troops out of politics. So it is important once again that senior military leaders be clear and confirm those long-held principles for the good of the nation and of the military.”

Sherrill and Slotkin point out that potential cabinet members for one candidate in the upcoming presidential election have called for the use of military forces to “participate actively” in unconstitutional domestic activities such as law enforcement and immigration. They also state that they will invoke the 1807 Insurrection Act, which could be used to justify deployment of active duty military against peaceful political protests. According to public reporting, the authors of Project 2025 – a “playbook” for the start of a Trump presidency written by close Trump associates – have drawn up plans to invoke the Insurrection Act from the start of a second Trump presidency to deploy military personnel to fill domestic law enforcement roles across the country. 

Pointing out that our senior-most military officials may be required to serve as guardrails against using the military in domestic affairs, Sherrill and Slotkin write, “We are relying on you to preserve the system that our Founding Fathers designed.”

In their letter, the congresswomen ask Austin, Brown and the other senior-most military officials to:

• Reaffirm that there can be only one president at a time.
• Acknowledge that federal law prohibits direct participation by members of the U.S. armed forces in search, seizure, arrest and law enforcement activities.
• Acknowledge that directing military personnel to support civilian law enforcement officials violates federal law if it adversely affects military preparedness.
• Acknowledge that deploying U.S. forces under the 1807 Insurrection Act, unless the specific conditions outlined in the act exist, is unlawful.
• Acknowledge that civilians exercising their constitutional rights to free speech and peaceful protest do not constitute an insurrection under the act.
• Acknowledge that U.S. forces are required to always act in accordance with U.S. and international law, including laws protecting civilians.
• Acknowledge that all members of the military are subject to military discipline, including prosecution, if they carry out unlawful orders – even if a president issuing such orders is immune from prosecution.

Sherrill and Slotkin have consistently advocated for maintaining the proper constitutional distinction between the military’s national defense role and domestic politics and policy. In 2020, they welcomed responses to then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Mark Milley to their questions about the potential involvement of military forces in the upcoming election. Milley’s clear statement that “I believe deeply in the principle of an apolitical U.S. military” received widespreadmediaattention, helping reinforce public confidence that the military would not interfere in domestic politics. On Jan. 6, 2021, those trying to disrupt the transition of power were not able to call on the military, and members of the National Guard helped to restore order in the Capitol and protect it in the days that followed.

###