Exactly one year ago today, I resigned my commission as a Lieutenant Commander in the United States Navy. For fourteen years, I had voluntarily accepted the standard bargain of military service that included signing away a substantial portion of my First Amendment rights. I reclaimed them just in time.
Upon entering civilian life with a decade of active-duty observations, I started writing more. Over the past twelve months, I contributed over twenty op-eds to The Fulcrum (in addition to being published by VoteVets, Slate, and The New York Times). The vast majority of my pieces have touched on national security or the military-connected community. Turns out, I have a lot to say. Also, there’s been no shortage of material.
We are currently observing a hostile takeover of the American armed forces. The Trump regime is deliberately engineering the military apparatus to enforce unquestioning obedience to the executive branch, attempting to transform the ranks into what I call a “brute squad of religiously motivated loyalists.” Concurrently, there is reason to believe Trump’s war in Iran is being extended simply to manipulate the markets and create a windfall of self-enrichment for the President and his friends, fundamentally compromising the integrity of military leadership. To accomplish these goals, the administration is actively working to suppress internal dissent and external oversight.
The scope of this effort is broad and alarming. President Trump has bypassed traditional Constitutional checks by committing service members to an ill-defined and illegal war of indefinite length with Iran, all while systematically weakening veteran services. Meanwhile, internal changes at the Pentagon include: the purging of women and people of color from leadership ranks, the restriction of independent press access, the gutting of civilian harm mitigation programs, the manipulation of casualty data, and the indoctrination of white Christian nationalist ideologies.
Perhaps most ominous is Defense Secretary Hegseth’s attacks on the Judge Advocate General (JAG) Corps, or the military’s cadre of lawyers. He just announced a sweeping review of the military justice and legal system, intending to ensure “maximum lethality” rather than “tepid legality.” Given that legality is being framed as an obstacle, this is a highly precarious situation for the force, to say the least. Not every military officer gets a law degree in her free time. Putting the onus on the average service member in a fast-moving battlespace to decipher complex constitutional boundaries or evaluate lawfulness is an immense burden.
Evidently, Trump wants to disempower service members from questioning what is unlawful. In the past year, he tried to convince a Grand Jury to indict several veteran lawmakers after they posted a 90-second video reminding servicemembers of their legal obligation to refuse such orders. Trump called the video “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL,” branded the lawmakers “traitors,” demanded they be “ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL,” and called their actions “punishable by DEATH!” When the President is threatening sitting Congressmen executions for simply restating the law, what 18-year-old kid is prepared to actually challenge an order? A leader anticipating illegal activity may hope that the question is rhetorical. Fear and intimidation help secure compliance.
Even I, as a relatively anonymous veteran, have been advised countless times this past year, in response to my advocacy, to “be safe.” There is a pervasive, palpable anxiety that public criticism of the current administration–especially of its military policy–carries real personal danger. I recognize both the privilege and the danger that come with using my voice as a veteran to advocate for those still serving. And though I do not claim to represent the views of all servicemembers, nor will the entirety of the force agree with my analyses, my inbox has been filled with messages over the past year from active-duty personnel offering quiet thank yous.
Trump and Hegseth do not represent the views of all service members either. There are plenty of folks serving who wish they could quit, which might be why the number of military personnel inquiring about conscientious objection has risen by 1,000% since the start of the Iran war. Many joined for the promise of stability and upward mobility, and now they are stuck in an organization run by a draft dodger who “finds the notion of military service difficult to understand, and the idea of volunteering to serve especially incomprehensible” and keeps putting off making a deal with Iran, claiming he could fight forever, flippantly suggesting there will likely be more deaths while referring to fallen Americans as ‘losers’ and ‘suckers’. I will keep fighting for them, and for this republic.
Veteran voices are obviously critical to these conversations, but Trump and Hegseth are actively seeking to stifle them. As dozens of retired high-ranking military leaders warned in an amicus brief submitted by the Vet Voice Foundation, it could easily become “unclear what constitutional protection would remain for veterans wishing to express public disagreement with a present Administration…” We need backup. Unfortunately, a profound civilian-military divide has allowed the public to often overlook the structural vulnerabilities of the force. I empathize with those who have kept the military at arm’s length out of anti-war sentiment or otherwise, but we cannot afford to abandon the actual human beings within it now. Leaving vulnerable service members to navigate a lawless command structure alone may allow the military to be turned into a weapon against our own democracy.
An understanding between civilians and veterans could go a long way in strengthening the forces of reform anyway. Take healthcare reform or student debt cancellation. Because our volunteer military relies heavily on the “poverty draft,” where access to higher education, comprehensive medical care, and basic financial security is leveraged as a recruitment tool, robust civilian social safety nets would take away the best carrots the armed forces have to dangle. As a result, we cannot meaningfully discuss these domestic social policies without simultaneously analyzing how our military model relies on these structural inequities. When we talk about almost any issue facing this country, the state of the military-industrial complex is relevant.
Ultimately, we cannot separate the fate of the troops from the fate of our own domestic battles. If we let those who swore an oath to support the Constitution fall, what will be left? Let’s not find out.
If you are a veteran, you possess a unique credibility on these issues, and I hope you join me in leveraging it. But if you are a civilian, I hope you recognize that the subversion of the military threatens the architecture of our democracy and join us too. We could use your help.
There is a new call of duty now, and we must answer. Our voices will be louder together.
Julie Roland was a Naval Officer for ten years, deploying to both the South China Sea and the Persian Gulf as a helicopter pilot before separating in June 2025 as a Lieutenant Commander. She has a law degree from the University of San Diego, a Master of Laws from Columbia University, and is a member of the Truman National Security Project.
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a“ Steel Across America” event ahead of the 25th anniversary of the Sept. 11th attacks on the Ellipse near the White House on Sept. 8, 2026 in Washington, D.C. President Trump welcomed 9/ 11 first responders to the Tunnel to Towers Foundation’ s“ Steel Across America” event featuring a 16,900- pound, 21- foot steel beam recovered.
For Trump, even 9/11 is an opportunity
There was a reason organizers of the 9/11 ceremony in Manhattan told President Trump he could not speak at this year’s memorial service.
A good one, it turns out.
Because in a speech he gave on Tuesday in Washington, he did exactly what they were presumably worried about — he made it about himself.
According to The New York Times, Trump had wanted a speaking role at the service, but the National Sept. 11 Memorial and Museum, which oversees the site, said no, as they’ve maintained for the past decade-plus that the venue and event should be nonpartisan.
Trump has long used awful tragedies to either puff himself up, trash political opponents, or sell lies to the American people.
He blamed a deadly plane crash at Washington National Airport last year on diversity, equity and inclusion policies. He blamed Puerto Ricans for the devastation they endured after Hurricane Maria in 2017. He reportedly considered withholding disaster relief after the California wildfires based on the way affected regions voted. In an interview on Fox News meant to commemorate the 75th anniversary of D-Day in Normandy, he used the occasion to slam former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi…with graves of the dead behind him.
And now, as we approach the 25th anniversary of what many New Yorkers consider the darkest day in modern history, Trump has done it again.
He told a rambling, nonsensical story — one he’s told before — about going to Ground Zero just after terrorists flew two commercial jets into the twin towers. In the story, which no one has been able to verify, despite multiple attempts, he says firefighters had to carry him out of One Liberty Plaza, also known as the U.S. Steel Building, because they thought it was about to collapse.
As CNN fact checker Daniel Dale notes, there’s no evidence Trump went into this building, especially at a time when NYPD and NYFD had locked down the area. There’s no evidence that building was collapsing — in fact, it was deemed structurally sound and reopened within two months of the attacks. There’s no evidence he was carried out of it by firefighters.
But the lie isn’t even the worst part. Pretend it was all true — why would the leader of our country, and a New Yorker, decide to make that tragic day about himself?
Because that’s who Donald Trump is. He’s a malignant narcissist.
He’s also, incidentally, a terrible and ineffectual president, who’s made ill-fated decisions that he has to keep defending, and there’s nothing he won’t do to make himself look and feel better.
Within the first two minutes of his speech, he was cravenly using 9/11 to justify and promote his dumb war in Iran — two events separated by 25 years and 6,000 miles.
“And I will tell you, we’re right now fighting because we have a certain nation that wanted a nuclear weapon, they were very close to getting it, and now they have no chance at getting it. They will never have a nuclear weapon. Iran will not have a nuclear weapon. And they’ve been punished greatly. As you know, we’ve really taken it to them.”
As a New Yorker who lived through 9/11, still one of the worst days of my life, I’m utterly sickened by Trump’s crass, political, and self-promotional framing of that awful day.
And I’m relieved he won’t be given a platform to do it again on Friday’s anniversary in lower Manhattan.
Because for Trump, everything is his for the taking, and absolutely nothing is sacred.
S.E. Cupp is the host of "S.E. Cupp Unfiltered" on CNN.