On November 23, 2025, President Donald Trump expressed his discontent on social media regarding a video released by six Democratic lawmakers, including Senator Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) and others, which encouraged military and intelligence officials to disregard illegal orders from the executive branch. Trump characterized their message as 'sedition' and demanded arrests, asserting that their actions constituted a serious crime deserving of severe consequences.

The video, featuring former military personnel, urged service members to adhere to their constitutional duties and reject any unlawful directives. In response, the Democrats issued a statement emphasizing that threats and intimidation would not deter them from advocating for adherence to the law.

Trump's posts included accusations of treason and seditious conspiracy against these lawmakers, although he did not provide specific legal justifications or cite legal scholars. His comments reflect growing frustration with congressional Republicans who have not supported his more extreme claims. Notably, he has previously suggested severe penalties for these actions, including execution, although he later refrained from explicitly repeating such threats.

Senator Slotkin responded by stating that she had not seen evidence of any illegal orders from the Department of Defense or the White House, suggesting that Trump's rhetoric may be an attempt to divert attention from pressing issues, such as economic concerns and recent revelations related to Jeffrey Epstein.

Legal experts have noted that the First Amendment protects a wide range of speech, including calls for government accountability, unless they incite imminent violence. The video in question does not appear to cross this threshold, as it does not advocate for violent resistance against the government.

Despite Trump's assertions, some of his allies in Congress have distanced themselves from his calls for legal action. House Speaker Mike Johnson acknowledged that Trump's choice of words was not one he would use, while attempting to frame the discussion around a legal definition of sedition, which is not a defined crime under U.S. law.

The situation has raised concerns about the potential for political violence, particularly in light of threats reported against lawmakers who have opposed Trump. While some Republicans have condemned political violence, there remains a notable reluctance to address the implications of Trump's rhetoric and its impact on political discourse.

Trump's history of inciting violence at rallies and his recent comments have led to fears about the normalization of aggressive political language and the potential consequences for democratic institutions. The ongoing discourse highlights the tension between political accountability and the protection of free speech, as well as the risks associated with militaristic rhetoric in a democratic society.