Experts say Pentagon faces roadblocks to severely punishing service members for disparaging Charlie Kirk
Source: CNN Politics
PUBLISHED Sep 15, 2025, 6:38 PM ET
As multiple service members are facing investigation or suspension for posts on social media critical of Charlie Kirk, experts told CNN there are legal roadblocks to the military actually taking significant action against them. A slew of accounts on X began posting screenshots of social media posts made by troops across the military services who were critical of Kirk and accused of mocking or celebrating his death. The accounts relentlessly tagged Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and other senior Pentagon officials to get their attention, calling for the service members to be fired.
On Thursday, Hegseth and the secretaries of the Army, Air Force and Navy posted similar comments promising action would be taken against inappropriate posts. The Department of War maintains a zero-tolerance policy for military personnel or DOW civilians who celebrate or mock the assassination of Charlie Kirk, the Pentagons Rapid Response account on X said, referencing the Defense Departments secondary title as Department of War.
Its unclear how many service members have been suspended or are now being investigated; but at least one Marine has been relieved of their duties while an investigation is carried out, according to a Marine Corps spokesman, and an Army officer has been suspended, according to an official familiar with the situation. But the legal authority for the military to take action against individuals for posts about public figures is murky.
Don Christensen, a retired Air Force colonel who previously served as a military judge and the Air Forces chief prosecutor, told CNN that service members could potentially be removed from their jobs, but that there is no legal standing for pressing charges against them under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. People who join the military have less First Amendment rights than those who dont, but they still have robust First Amendment rights, Christen said. And while there are exceptions for making disparaging remarks about the chain of command or political statements in uniform, Christensen added, theres not a carve-out that says Pete Hegseth doesnt like what youre saying so Im going to prosecute you.
Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/15/politics/experts-pentagon-punishment-kirk-posts

mdbl
(7,333 posts)Deriding some asshole's hate speech?
BumRushDaShow
(160,037 posts)Shipwack
(2,850 posts)Puppyjive
(833 posts)Last edited Tue Sep 16, 2025, 07:36 AM - Edit history (1)
What a way to lose the public backing of our military. I really advise young people to not take the leap and join. You may find yourself in combat with your fellow Americans. This is the America we now live in. No more defending our constitution.
Walleye
(42,431 posts)mopinko
(72,953 posts)only magats will join this shit show, and there wont b many.
SickOfTheOnePct
(8,448 posts)Recruiting goals for 2025.
Irish_Dem
(74,705 posts)Snoopy 7
(686 posts)If hegseth beleives reposting what kirk spewed out of his racist mouth is a crime/hate speach. Then that only leaves us with one thought and that thought would be that you agree with the crap that kirk was spewing while he was live. SO, if hegseth agrees with what kirk said how can he punish the repeating of kirks words with out condeming what kirk said. See the kunudrum? If you are previously in the military or have been in the military and you agree with what kirk was saying you should look in the mirror and ask youself 'what's wrong with me'...
SickOfTheOnePct
(8,448 posts)...to do much to anyone who simply repeated Kirk's words or said they weren't sad that he was killed.
The ones (very few, if any I'm sure) who will most likely be in trouble are the ones who made comments celebrating the killing ("good shot", "glad he was killed", things along those lines)
It's a fine line, but for someone who takes an oath to defend the Constitution, including the First Amendment, agreeing that someone should be murdered for their speech isn't really compatible with that oath.
Same for federal employees.
OldBaldy1701E
(9,036 posts)Yet.