One day after Tyler Robinson allegedly gunned down popular right-wing influencer Charlie Kirk, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told his staff to identify any members of the military who had mocked or condoned the assassination of Kirk. According to defense officials, Hegseth also said that those who did so can be punished. Several service members have already been relieved from their jobs because of such posts, the officials said, and added that Hegseth’s directive also pertains to others associated with the Defense Department.
Five days after Hegseth’s comments, Air Force Secretary Troy Meink responded by releasing a memo via e-mail entitled “Personnel Responsibilities Associated with Public Communications.”
The memo implores USAF personnel to understand and ensure full compliance with all laws and regulations governing speech and political activities and clearly spells out the penalties that could be imposed, under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), if those laws are not followed.
Kirk’s Murder Sparks Pentagon Response
At this point, it’s unclear exactly how many DoD personnel have been disciplined for negative comments related to Kirk’s murder. Hegseth and other senior Pentagon leaders posted messages on X calling on the public to report any posts that could be interpreted as negative about Kirk or unsympathetic about his murder.
Hegseth wrote on X last Thursday that, “We are tracking all these very closely — and will address, immediately. Completely unacceptable.”
Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell saying on X, “It is unacceptable for military personnel and Department of War civilians to celebrate or mock the assassination of a fellow American.”
“The Department of War has zero tolerance for it,” Parnell added.
One US military officer said DoD personnel know they are not allowed to condone political violence, but are less clear on the rules governing criticism of a person, particularly a civilian, who has no ties to the military. Incidents of punishing military personnel for this act are very rare.
“We can’t criticize the commander in chief, but I can’t remember anyone ever telling me we can’t say anything critical about a civilian like this. He was not in our chain of command or anything,” the officer said.
The Defense Department deferred further action on this issue to the individual services, and the Air Force responded first with SECAF’s memorandum. It’s still unclear whether the other services will release similar guidance.
What Can and Can’t Be Said?
Military members have long been aware that their political activities are regulated in both official, while on duty, and personal capacities. For example, a military member is not supposed to wear their uniform to political events like rallies. That’s always been pretty clear.
It’s also been clear that officers, under Article 88 of the UCMJ, are prohibited from using contemptuous language towards the President, Vice President, the Secretaries of War and of a military department, Congress, and certain other officials.
Additionally, no service member may disrespect a superior commissioned officer with their speech or actions. SECAF’s new memorandum seems to take things to a new level. You can find the complete memorandum below, but here are some of the key points. Exact verbiage from the memorandum is italicized.
Personnel Held Personally Responsible
Under the new memorandum, USAF and US Space Force personnel will be personally responsible for what they say and do, including on social media.
According to the memo,
They must avoid any social media posts that unlawfully attack or demean a person or group based on characteristics such as race, religion, ethnicity, national origin, or political beliefs. Social media posts that include offensive and inappropriate language or behavior, that advocate for or condone violence in any manner, or that bully or harass will be dealt with immediately.
These posts display a failure to adhere to our core values and may subject Airmen and Guardians to corrective administrative or punitive action, including discharge.
Commanders Will Take an Active Role
The memorandum directs commanders at all levels to take an active role in identifying non-compliant behavior.
According to the memo,
Commanders at all levels shall not tolerate online social media conduct that violates the law or fails to live up to our core values. The lawful exercise of free speech must be protected. However, the UCMJ makes it clear that speech or conduct that violates lawful regulations, brings discredit to the DAF, or undermines good order and discipline should be directly and immediately addressed.
No Airman or Guardian is permitted or empowered to use technology, social media, or the internet to commit illegal acts that threaten or harm the effectiveness of our national security or the American people. Commanders should use all tools available to investigate and, if appropriate, hold violators accountable.
Political Activities Emphasized
While military members have been aware of limitations placed on their political activities, the memorandum adds additional guidance on how these activities will be regulated.
Service members must also understand their political activities are regulated in both official capacities (while performing duties and/or representing the Department of the Air Force) and personal capacities. Senior personnel bear heightened responsibility as their statements carry greater perceived authority.
Even when engaging in permissible activities, service members must include all required disclaimers and clearly state their opinions are personal, including on social media accounts. However, a disclaimer does not excuse unlawful or service-discrediting behavior.
Ultimately, the service will determine whether or not the political activities of the service member were unlawful or inappropriate.
Applicable UCMJ Articles
According to the memorandum, if a service member is found to have violated this expanded guidance, they could face administrative or disciplinary action under the following UCMJ Articles:
- Article 92: Failure to obey orders
- Article 133: Conduct unbecoming
- Article 134: Conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. This article strictly prohibits behavior that undermines the DAF mission or brings discredit upon the armed forces.
- Article 88: Prohibits commissioned officers from using contemptuous language towards the President, Vice President, the Secretaries of War and of a military department, Congress, and certain other officials. Additionally, no service member may disrespect a superior commissioned officer with their speech or actions.
Private Conduct Scrutinized
Secretary Meink concluded his memorandum with a direct message to Airmen and Guardians:
“Your private conduct must not interfere or be a distraction to our Department accomplishing our most consequential missions. Our standards are not just aspirational—they are essential to preserving the trust placed in us by the American people.
Your unwavering commitment to these standards ensures we maintain our focus on lethality, meritocracy, accountability, and readiness that our nation demands. Every service member will uphold the highest standards of conduct without exception—our national security depends on it.”
Is This New?
The short answer is no. Military members have always been aware that they are held to a higher standard than their civilian countrymen. They take an oath to defend the Constitution and obey the orders of those appointed over them. The key word there is “orders.” Military personnel follow orders, and this new SECAF memorandum is, by definition, an order.
What is perhaps new is the emphasis on social media. Will commanders take measures to monitor the social media accounts of their personnel, or will they rely on personnel within their respective chains of command to monitor the social media activities of their “squadron mates?”
It’s safe to say that military personnel have been known to have lively discussions on social media. Determining what is allowed or disallowed under the new guidance may present significant challenges to responsible commanders. This is new territory.
You can read the full memo here.
Suggested reads:
