Federal grand jury declines to indict six Democratic lawmakers

A federal grand jury in Washington declined to return indictments on Feb. 11 against six Democratic lawmakers who appeared in a brief video urging military and intelligence personnel to resist orders they believed illegal. The decision closes, at least for now, a contentious effort by prosecutors to criminalize the lawmakers' speech and underscores unresolved questions about the limits of political advocacy directed at uniformed personnel.

The six lawmakers identified in the matter are Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona, Rep. Jason Crow of Colorado, Rep. Chris Deluzio of Pennsylvania, Rep. Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, and Rep. Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire. All six have backgrounds in military or intelligence service, a fact cited by investigators and critics as central context for the video’s message and for the Justice Department’s interest.

Prosecutors presented a 90-second clip posted in November in which the lawmakers warned of “threats to our Constitution” and repeatedly urged members of the military and intelligence communities to “refuse illegal orders.” The video also included the line, “Now, more than ever, the American people need you. Don’t give up the ship.” The public reaction was immediate and polarized: the president at the time called the lawmakers’ comments “seditious” and demanded they be “arrested and put on trial.”

Justice Department officials in Washington authorized prosecutors to present the matter to a grand jury. Those involved in the internal deliberations were drawn from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington, which oversight records indicate had signed off on the presentation. Justice Department sources told reporters that prosecutors sought to proceed under 18 U.S.C. § 2387, a statute that criminalizes directing or counseling members of the armed forces to refuse their duties, though the exact charging document and the precise language presented to the grand jury have not been made public.

Investigators also sought interviews with the six lawmakers, and federal agents contacted some members of Congress as part of the inquiry. Several lawmakers indicated they would not cooperate with the probe. The refusal by the grand jury to indict means no criminal charges were filed at this stage; grand jury proceedings remain sealed and the reasons jurors reached their decision are not public.

The outcome drew sharp criticism from former prosecutors and legal ethicists who viewed the attempt as an overreach. Kyle Boynton, a former federal prosecutor who advised Justice Department lawyers on professional conduct, said, “The attempt to indict these members of Congress is shocking, more so than the indictments of James Comey and Letitia James. It is not enough that the grand jury declined to indict. Every Justice Department attorney involved in submitting this indictment for the grand jury's consideration has violated the rules of professional conduct, including supervisors.”

Legal scholars say the case highlights a fraught intersection of free speech protections for public officials and statutes meant to preserve military discipline. It also raises institutional questions about the degree to which prosecutors should pursue politically charged cases and the role of local U.S. attorney offices in politically sensitive matters. Prosecutors have not publicly disclosed whether they will seek to re-present the matter or pursue alternative charges, and the Justice Department has not issued an on-the-record statement explaining the next steps.