Every time American politics seems to have hit peak absurdity, someone finds a taller ladder. Last week it was President Donald Trump, who posted on TruthSocial that six Democratic lawmakers had committed "SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH" because they shared a video reminding U.S. servicemen that they are allowed, indeed obligated, to refuse unlawful orders. He even reposted a supporter's charming call to "HANG THEM," adding that in "the old days" such disobedience carried the death penalty.

As a conservative, I'm no apologist for the progressive wing of Congress; and I write from Australia! Some of them seem determined to turn the republic into a therapeutic daycare centre. But political sanity requires something more than reflexive tribal loyalty. The rule of law still matters. Words still matter. And when a president starts accusing his political opponents of capital crimes, conservatives should take a breath before cheering.

Let's look at the two questions that matter most:

​​

(1) Did the lawmakers commit sedition?

(2) Are military servicemen allowed to disobey unlawful orders?

The answer to both is simple: Trump has the law wrong on both counts.

1. No, This is Not "Sedition" — Not Under Any Coherent Reading of the Law

American law actually defines sedition; it is not a free-floating insult to be hurled at inconvenient opponents. Under 18 U.S.C. § 2384, seditious conspiracy requires actively conspiring to overthrow the government by force, delaying execution of laws by force, or taking up arms against U.S. authority.

What did these lawmakers do?
They posted a video citing established military ethics: that soldiers must refuse orders that violate the U.S. Constitution or the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

You may think their timing was pointed. You may think the message was politically motivated; and it clearly was. But none of that remotely resembles "conspiring to overthrow the government by force." Their message was essentially: "Don't commit war crimes." If that counts as sedition, then so does every JAG training manual and half of West Point's ethics curriculum.

Trump's claim that their message is "punishable by death" is simply legally false. The only time sedition historically carried capital punishment was during the Civil War, an era Trump himself invoked when he said "in the old days it was death." Indeed, it was, but we no longer shoot dissident politicians on sight, and conservatives should be the first to uphold that progress.

2. Yes, Servicemen Must Refuse Unlawful Orders—This Is Bedrock Military Law

The second question is even easier.

It is not optional for U.S. servicemen to refuse unlawful orders. It is required.

This principle was not invented by a group of progressive lawmakers for the sake of a TikTok video. It is older than the republic. It is embedded in U.S. law, repeatedly affirmed in court-martial precedent, demanded by the Nuremberg Principles, and cemented in the duty of every officer.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) states plainly that a service member is liable for following an unlawful order. "Just following orders" has not been a defence since the 1940s. This protects the military, the Constitution, and ultimately the country from the very real danger of politicised or rogue commands.

If tomorrow a president — any president — ordered the military to do something plainly illegal, unconstitutional, or immoral, servicemen would not only be allowed to refuse — they would be honour-bound to do so.

Conservatives, who traditionally champion limited government and constitutional restraints, should be thankful this principle exists.

There is a growing temptation in segments of the right to treat the presidency as a kind of tribal chieftainship: whatever "our guy" commands must be obeyed without question, and anyone who disagrees is a traitor. That is not conservatism. That is Caesarism.

Conservatism, properly understood, is a defence of order, restraint, constitutional boundaries, and the idea that power, especially executive power, must be held in check. A president who demands absolute loyalty from the military, and labels dissent "sedition," is not speaking the language of the Founders. He is speaking the language the Founders revolted against.

Americans can support Trump's policies. They can support his candidacy. But you cannot pretend that every outburst on TruthSocial is compatible with the rule of law. It is not.

No crime was committed by lawmakers reminding soldiers of their legal obligations.

No sedition occurred, not by any definition recognised in American law.

Soldiers must refuse unlawful orders. That is what keeps the republic free.

And conservatives, of all people, should oppose the idea that any president can bypass law and conscience by decree.

Political opponents are not traitors. Disagreement is not insurrection. And the death penalty is not a social-media punchline.