In early February 2026, federal prosecutors in Washington, D.C. terminated the case against six Democratic lawmakers accused of encouraging military servicemembers to refuse illegal orders through a social media video. This decision followed a unanimous rejection by a federal grand jury of the attempt to indict these lawmakers, which included military and intelligence veterans. Their video, released in November 2025, aimed to remind servicemembers of their legal duty under the Uniform Military Code of Justice to refuse unlawful orders, a context that became critical as U.S. military actions drew scrutiny for potential violations of international law. The lawmakers in question—Elissa Slotkin, Mark Kelly, Maggie Goodlander, Jason Crow, Chris Deluzio, and Chrissy Houlahan—responded to President Donald Trump's injurious remarks labeling them as 'traitors' and implying that their video constituted a crime. They characterized Trump's reaction as an attack on free speech and an attempt to suppress political dissent. The tensions escalated, marked by calls for demotions within the military and investigations into their actions, fueled by heightened political animosity. Before dropping the case, Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. attorney for D.C., faced significant pressure, with critics alleging that the prosecution was politically motivated. Numerous letters from attorneys representing the lawmakers expressed concerns about the legality and rationality of pursuing such charges, emphasizing that the grand jury's decision indicated a lack of probable cause. Ultimately, Pirro's office decided not to pursue the matter further, although it retains the potential to bring charges in a different jurisdiction. The lawmakers expressed that they would continue advocating for free speech, underscoring that their actions did not merit prosecution under the law. This case spotlights the ongoing turmoil in U.S. politics over issues of military ethics and the boundaries of free speech in relation to government authority.