Menu
Sign In Search Podcasts Charts People & Topics Add Podcast API Blog Pricing
Podcast Image

Beau of The Fifth Column

Let's talk about Trump losing again in Portland and lawful orders....

18 Oct 2025

Transcription

Chapter 1: What are the legal challenges surrounding Trump's orders in Portland?

1.668 - 31.287 Beau

Well, howdy there internet people, it's Belle again. So today we're going to talk about Trump losing in Portland again and orders. US District Judge Karen Emmergut extended her order blocking deployment of National Guard troops in Portland for another 14 days. This gives more time for legal challenges to play out. The case is currently expected to go to trial on October 29th.

0

32.852 - 59.994 Beau

A three-judge panel with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is still weighing whether Trump should be blocked as well. They could effectively end the judge's order. Now, as time goes on and the status remains relatively unchanged and relatively calm, it becomes harder to cast the situation as something akin to an emergency, requiring special emergency moves. Let's be real.

0

60.874 - 85.187 Beau

If what Trump was saying was true about war-torn Portland, it would be ashes by now. But it's not. Outside of a one-block area, it's pretty calm. But this coming back into the news cycle gives us a chance to talk about some questions that came up a lot after the General's clip stressing lawful orders went viral.

0

Chapter 2: Who determines if a military order is unlawful?

86.328 - 117.045 Beau

The question is, who determines an order is unlawful? I'm sure there are going to be a whole genre of LawTube videos about this eventually. So, rather than rehash all of the stuff they'll probably cover better, we're going to go over the practical application. Who determines an order is unlawful? In short, a military judge, long after the order was given and either obeyed or disobeyed.

0

117.481 - 145.429 Beau

If a service member disobeyed an order, even if they're correct, they might have to sit in a cell for a lengthy period until a judge determines, hey, yes, it was an unlawful order. There's a whole bunch of legal if this, then that. But once it's all charted, orders are assumed by service members to be lawful, unless it is manifestly unlawful. What's that mean in normal person speak?

0

146.067 - 167.569 Beau

The order is unlawful and there is zero nuance, and I mean none. The requirement to disobey unlawful orders, and it is a requirement, isn't there so a junior enlisted soldier has to debate the constitutionality of deploying to an American city through the lens of the Insurrection Act of 1807.

0

168.443 - 191.552 Beau

It's there so if they're on the street and they're ordered to open fire on a crowd of unarmed Americans, they know they're required to disobey. The duty to disobey will not create a situation where your average soldier is refusing to deploy. If they're ordered to show up, they will show up, barring a court order not to.

0

191.592 - 197.86 Unknown

The higher you go up in the chain, the more responsible you are for the orders.

198.515 - 226.907 Beau

It's incredibly unlikely that anybody below kernel even considers the lawfulness of an order unless it is manifestly unlawful or patently unlawful, depending on what governing law you're looking at. But they both mean the same thing. It has to be plainly unlawful. You get to colonel and above, and they start paying more attention. But even then, they don't normally just say no.

227.488 - 255.407 Beau

They call a military lawyer and get advice. That brings us to the big question. If lower-ranking soldiers operate under the assumption that the orders are lawful, and those are the ones people would be interacting with the most on the street, doesn't that mean there's a chance they'll follow an unlawful order and violate the rights of Americans only to have it sorted out later? Yes.

256.249 - 281.437 Beau

That's why this is such a stupid idea. Corporal Smith is probably not going to tell his company commander no if that commander orders him to pull everybody off a bus and search them. Right now, you're saying, but the Fourth Amendment makes that manifestly unlawful. Corporal Smith didn't go to law school. He might have barely graduated high school.

282.358 - 309.083 Beau

Later, that company commander will get in trouble, but it won't stop the infraction. If you're an officer who might be deployed, you'd better get real familiar with constitutional law regarding searches, detentions, and so on. You don't know the meaning of the term Blue Falcon until you're watching flag-ranked officers cover for each other at the expense of Lieutenant Never Met Him.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Please log in to write the first comment.