Defense Department Moves to Review Retired Rank of U.S. Senator
Six weeks ago, , alongside five other members of Congress, released a public video that senior defense officials now describe as reckless, destabilising, and fundamentally incompatible with military order and discipline.
The statements were delivered publicly, deliberately, and without qualification. They directly challenged the legality of ongoing U.S. military operations and urged service members to disregard lawful orders.
Coming from a retired Navy Captain who continues to receive military pay, the remarks triggered immediate concern within the Department of War and across the national security establishment.
Retired Rank Does Not Mean Retired Accountability
Despite his status as a sitting United States Senator, Captain Mark E. Kelly, USN (Ret.) remains subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice by virtue of his retired status and continued receipt of pay.
Defense officials stress that military accountability does not lapse upon retirement, that elected office does not override military law, and that receipt of retired pay preserves UCMJ jurisdiction.
This principle has been long established and repeatedly upheld.
Formal Administrative Action Initiated
In response to the statements, the Department of War has initiated formal administrative proceedings against Captain Kelly.
Retirement grade determination proceedings have been opened under 10 U.S.C. § 1370(f), a process that may result in a reduction of retired rank and a corresponding reduction in retired pay.
This mechanism exists specifically to address post-service misconduct inconsistent with the standards of commissioned officers.
Letter of Censure Issued
To support the proceedings, the Secretary of War has issued a formal Letter of Censure.
According to the Department, the censure documents a sustained pattern of reckless misconduct, will be permanently entered into Captain Kelly’s official military personnel file, and constitutes a required procedural step in the retirement grade determination process.
This is not symbolic. It is administrative groundwork.
Timeline and Due Process
Captain Kelly has been formally notified and afforded procedural protections.
He has 30 days to submit a written response.
A final determination is expected within 45 days, as directed by Secretary Hegseth.
Officials emphasise the process is deliberate, structured, and evidence-based.
Nature of the Alleged Violations
The Department’s findings cite public statements made between June and December 2025, in which Captain Kelly characterised lawful military operations as illegal and encouraged members of the Armed Forces to refuse lawful orders.
According to defense officials, this conduct was seditious in nature and constituted violations of Article 133 — Conduct Unbecoming an Officer and Article 134 — Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline, provisions that continue to apply to retired officers receiving pay.
No Immunity Shield
Defense officials were explicit. Rank does not shield misconduct. Retirement does not erase obligation. Political office does not confer immunity.
Further violations, they note, could prompt additional administrative or disciplinary action.
The Department’s Message
The message from the Department of War is unambiguous:
Military law does not yield to politics.
Retirement does not end responsibility.
And no office places an individual beyond accountability.
If you want this shorter, harsher, or broadcast-ready, say the word and I’ll cut it clean.
Leave a Reply