No. of Recommendations: 8
"Does it though? SCOTUS suggests otherwise with its new constitutional immunity clause. Depending on individuals to refuse the direct order of the commander in chief seems to be a thin thread upon which to hang the safety of our democracy. The only sanction against such an “official act” is impeachment."
Especially since it is well known that if someone in the military tells the president "No, that is an illegal order", the president can then just ask other people until he finds someone who will go along. It is no different than what Trump did with the DoJ. When Jeff Sessions started telling him "No" too much, he replaced him with Bill Barr who would say yes more often. Then when Bill Barr started reaching his breaking point, he was ready to replace him with Jeffery Clark.
Point is, depending upon individuals to refuse a direct order of the commander in chief is a recipe for disaster because there is always someone who will say yes.
