Watching videos of basic training at the Air Force Academy recently made me wonder just how literally the president’s Commander-in-Chief power truly extends. Suppose the President is reviewing a parade of U.S. troops, and then he suddenly tells a soldier to drop and give him 50 pushups, is the soldier supposed to do so?
For that matter, does everyone who out-ranks a soldier, have the right to make him/her do anything (that is militarily legal?) Every superior can tell a junior to give him 100 pushups on the spot? 4-star general tells colonel to do pullups on the bar?
Ludicrous question, but taking it to its literal extreme.
I know technically there is no rule saying the President can’t do that. Its just not done because the Pres doesn’t actually give specific military orders verbally, he is told by the top brass that it all has to be in writing, passed through the specific channels…
I’m betting the GI getting ordered by the Pres would likely say as much. “Sorry sir, I have orders contradicting from my unit , XYZ , sir.”. Because he is expected to do that when he gets confronted when he’s on some other units patch and someone pulls rank somehow.
Sorry, but that would not happen at all. The soldier would do the 50 pushups. Lawful direct orders from the Commander in Chief would of course be obeyed. Why would you think differently?
If the President didn’t mind appearing to be an asshole then yes he could order anyone in the military chain of command to drop and give him 50 push ups. It’s very clear that he has constitutional authority to do so as commander in chief, there is no one to appeal his order to, he could order someone court martialed for not doing so and it would stick.
Of course the President doesn’t want to look like an asshole even though some people may believe him to be one. He really isn’t that stupid.
Isn’t that how it works in any large organization? Why should the army be any different?
If Bill Gates walked into the Microsoft offices (when he was still the top dog), he could tell the janitor to stop sweeping the floor and go clean the restroom–right now.
As long as the task is part of your job, anybody can tell you do it, even if they are so far above you in the hierarchy that you rarely have any contact with them.
I’ve always wondered where the line is. Like, what if the President told the troops: “I’ve determined we have a hostile congress. Go into the House while they are in session and kill everybody.”
I mean, I know they wouldn’t follow such orders, but where is the line?
So, this is interesting since most of the directives/regs/instructions for DoD personnel more or less pertain to that branch. What branch would the POTUS belong to in order for us to look this up? Sure, there’s the generic UCMJ articles but it gets more specific as anyone who has actually served anytime will tell you.
I’ll have to find it, but in the Navy someone who was senior to you can order you to give you 50 push-ups so long as they are willing to do it along with you. My recollection of that it was more less a physical training thing at that point whereas if they order you to give you 50 for no reason then it could be seen as punishment. Which has its own course to follow.
There some exceptions in the military. Higher rank might be sufficient for some orders, but generally a higher ranking NCO/officer’s order is valid only if they are in your chain-of-command; otherwise, they are not a proper authority. In other words, as an example given to us during basic officer training. If a medical doctor who is a colonel orders you to help carry some boxes from A to B, and it is peace time on base, it is probably best to do just do what they ask even though he’s not in your chain-of-command. If it is wartime and this same colonel orders you to charge that machine gun, you should not obey that order because he’s not in your chain-of-command. The president as commander-in-chief, I’m assuming is the top of everybody’s chain-of-command and therefore his lawful orders should be followed, which would include doing push-ups.
The line is whether an order is lawful and whether it comes from a proper authority. The president is a proper authority (assuming he is in fact the top of the chain-of-command); however, such an order would not be lawful and therefore should not be followed.
Every job I have ever had with a formal job description included the line “Other duties as assigned.” I’ve seen a lot of people find out the hard way that it’s not wise to play the “not in my job description” card.
The line there is that committing murder is unlawful. Of course, it’s Congress who decides what the law is. So if you’re really clever, you get one of your confederates to sneak in an amendment that says “killing Representatives shall not constitute murder.” Then your plan is hatched.
No, soldiers only have to obey orders that come from someone higher in their chain of command. There are some wartime situations where this might get fuzzier, and interservice interactions can get complicated, but they’re irrelevant here. So a fresh second lieutenant can’t actually just walk up to any random private or NCO and tell them what to do, they’ll refuse the order and report him, and he’ll get in trouble for playing games. The president is in the unique position of being at the top of everyone’s chain of command, so his orders are valid for anyone.
Eh, it depends. Chain of command matters here. Is the O-10 in the O-6’s chain of command? If so, it’s a lawful order and he’d better get pushing. If they’re not in the same chain, then the way it’s supposed to work is that the O-10 would go up his own chain and ask someone in the O-6’s chain to order the O-6 to do 100 push ups. When you get up to that level, that could be difficult, as sometimes the only step between two 4 stars is the president.
The president is in everyone’s chain.
This comes up a lot at lower levels all the time. An NCO might ask an unknown private to help clean up an area for a VIP visit, and the unknown private could rightfully and respectfully say that he hadn’t received any such order from his supervisor, and that he had a conflicting duty. If there was an actual need to have all hands on deck to clean the area, the NCO would ask his supervisor, who would ask his commander, who would call the other commander, who would tell one of his NCOs to order the private to get to work cleaning.
Generally it doesn’t come to that, people are reasonable and don’t ask their subordinates to do dumb stuff, and lower ranking people are generally able to make judgement calls about when and where to lend a hand even if proper protocol isn’t followed.
There’s already been a few good posts on chain of command, but one situation where it is clear just out-ranking somebody doesn’t work is when soldiers are guarding a gate. Even if you are an officer you can’t just order them to let you pass.
I didn’t do guard duty but I had to refuse orders from officers out-ranking me a few times when I was in the military. I was one of the people in charge of writing deployment orders for our unit’s vehicles and sometimes the written orders needed to be changed: hours added to the end or more vehicles added to the order. We had a strict list of who were authorized to order us to make those changes and sometimes we got a phone call from the field from a LT that they would be late and the orders needed to be changed and we had to say “I’m sorry but we can’t do that for you”. Then they got somebody higher up the chain to call and we were able to comply.
Any military commander has the authority to issue lawful orders to any service members under them in the chain of command. “Drop and give me 20” is a lawful order, and all service members are under the President in his chain of command. Therefore, he could.
It would be extremely unusual for him to do so, but then, it’s also extremely unusual for that order to be given by a general, or even by a lieutenant. Usually, it’s going to be a sergeant issuing orders of that sort. An officer issuing orders that would usually be given by a sergeant might be within his authority, but he’s probably not very good at his job.
As to the business of refusing orders: In one of Heinlein’s books, a very junior officer in training is told by his slightly-less junior immediate supervisor over lunch to eat his pie with a fork, not with his hands. The junior officer fancies himself a barracks lawyer, and had just read that officers could be required to issue orders in writing, and so he requires the pie order be put into writing, thinking that this will make his superior back down. Instead, the superior writes out an order to eat the pie with a fork, and then writes out another order for the junior to meet with the base commander to discuss the legality of orders of this sort.
Now, if the order had been illegal (like, “march into the Capitol Building and shoot all the representatives”), then the proper course of action would be for the soldier to ask for the order in writing, and then still refuse it. The soldier will be court-martialed for this, at which point he will present the written order as evidence, and the court will decide whether the order was actually illegal, after which someone will get in serious trouble one way or the other.
Can the president himself be subject to court martial? Since he’s technically a member of the military, it seems like he could, but there must be some rule that prevents that.
Sorry, but this isn’t true either. As a SNCO, I didn’t have to be in someone’s chain of command to order them to help me carry stuff, or clean an area, or pick up some trash. In the Pentagon, there are hundreds of Generals and Colonels, all of which could order me to do something, and none of whom were in my chain of command. Not sure where everyone gets this idea from. Movies? TV?
As posted above, the only way this doesn’t apply is if you have written orders signed by someone higher than the person saying it. For example, I worked in the Communications Center, and we received messages about active duty deaths. Our Air Force Instructions explicitly prohibited us from reading any messages over the phone. A young airmen one night received such a message and called the Commander of the Support Group (the person we were supposed to call) and he wanted her to read the message, or at least the name. And she refused, rightly. The Colonel, understandably, was pissed, and came right into the Comm Center at 2:30 AM, along with about 5 other members of our chain of command. And he ranted and raved, but the airman, to her credit, stuck to her guns, and she was backed up by everyone in the chain, since the written instructions prohibited her from reading the message.
Now, if there wasn’t a written instruction, then of course she would have to comply and read the message, even though the Colonel wasn’t in her chain of command.