'roadblocks' Or Supports? Military Lawyers Question Hegseth’s Firings.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s firing of top legal staff has alarmed military lawyers, who distrust the motives of someone who publicly defended troops accused of war crimes and questioned the legitimacy of long-established codes of conduct.

Hegseth promises to replace the lead lawyers for the Army, Navy and Air Force with a “broader set” of people, just as active-duty troops head to the border on a vaguely defined mission and the Trump administration shows a propensity for smashing norms with little concern for legal backlash.

The former Fox News host successfully lobbied President Donald Trump during his first term to pardon two soldiers accused of war crimes. He also pushed for the reinstatement of a Navy SEAL who was charged with crimes in Iraq, including stabbing to death a teenage Islamic State prisoner and then taking a picture with his corpse.

“We've heard from the president that he wants people who are loyal to him, and we've heard from [Hegseth] that he doesn't like lawyers who prosecute people he doesn't think should be accused of war crimes,” said a former lawyer to a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “So, the suggestion there is that they want somebody that's going to do their bidding.”

Hegseth has made restoring a “warrior ethos” a core part of his agenda, and rejected what he sees as a softening of the military under diversity efforts and restrictive rules in combat. He said Sunday that he doesn’t want lawyers who are “roadblocks” to decisions he or military commanders make.

The terminations of Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair Gen. CQ Brown and Navy Adm. Lisa Franchetti, which occurred at the same time, had been rumored for months. But the firings of the judge advocates general — with no reason given for their ouster — came as a shock, even to the lawyers themselves.

The Judge Advocates Association said in a statement that it is “deeply concerned” by the firings of nonpartisan lawyers. Their removal “tends to subvert the independence and integrity of the military justice system, which is essential to combat readiness and critical to national security.”

The Pentagon did not respond to a request for comment.

The judge advocates general, also known as JAGs, advise everyone from the joint chiefs to commanders in the field. They are drawn from the officer ranks and, as members of the military, committed to being nonpartisan. They’re nominated by a board of officers that makes recommendations to the Defense secretary, who approves them. The president then nominates the picks for Senate confirmation.

Hegseth has long expressed skepticism for the work these lawyers do.

In his 2024 book, “The War on Warriors,” Hegseth referred to judge advocates general as “jagoffs,” and asked “should we follow the Geneva conventions ... Aren't we just better off in winning our wars according to our own rules?”

He argued during Trump’s first term for pardoning Maj. Mathew Golsteyn and First Lt. Clint Lorance, who were both arrested for war crimes. Golsteyn was accused of killing an Afghan in custody who was suspected of making bombs for the Taliban. Lorance was accused of ordering his soldiers to kill civilians. They were pardoned.

Hegseth also used his Fox airtime to advocate for the reinstatement of Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher, who was arrested in 2018 and charged with killing civilians in Iraq. Gallagher made international news for taking a picture with a dead Islamic State prisoner. He was later acquitted of all charges.

They had all been turned in by their own units.

The lawyer firing "seems like more of a Hegseth thing than a Trump thing,” said one former DOD official who worked closely with military lawyers and, like others, was granted anonymity to discuss a sensitive issue. “It seems distinct from the idea that the president needs fresh military leadership.”

While these top lawyers can only provide advice to military commanders, their independent interpretation of the law is a vital part of major decisions made by the service chiefs.

Some military lawyers worry the firings will taint whoever takes the job next. “Anyone nominated to replace them will be viewed by many, both inside and outside the ranks, as simply a compliant politico,” wrote Charlie Dunlap, a retired Air Force major general who served as the service’s deputy JAG before his retirement in 2010.

Others question whether the firings are even legal since Defense Department employees are not allowed to interfere with a judge advocate general’s ability to give legal advice.

“The actions have been taken for no stated cause or performance issues, and that creates a chilling effect,” said Scott Flesch, a former Army lawyer. “It threatens the independence and quality of advice upon which commanders rely and which the JAG corps is required to provide.”

He warned pulling lawyers from lower ranks would mean they couldn't get access to important meetings.

“It will keep the lawyer out of the rooms where the decisions are made,” he said. “And if they’re kept out of that room, they’re not hearing the information necessary to give neutral, non-partisan, independent feedback and advice.”

Jack Detsch contributed to this report.