0
THE abrupt dismissal of the US military’s most senior uniformed lawyers marks a troubling escalation in the Trump administration’s campaign to dismantle any and all legal constraints on the Pentagon, CNN reported.
Lt Gen Joe Berger, the US Army’s chief legal officer, and his Air Force counterpart, Lt Gen Charles Plummer, were sacked by Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth earlier this year, sending shockwaves through the military’s legal establishment.
The firings came after Berger raised constitutional concerns about deploying National Guard troops for immigration enforcement, and questioned the legality of mass dismissals of civil servants.
The defence secretary later characterised these challenges as potential “roadblocks” to presidential orders.
Top JAG officers lose their jobs after probing Trump admin plans to deploy National Guard, dismiss temporary staff
Hegseth seems to be shaping the Pentagon in his image. In a recent speech to top generals from around the world, he railed against rules of engagement and decried the lack of fitness of ‘fat’ officers.
More recently, the Pentagon has sought to impose restrictions on press access, asking media outlets to sign a new policy that would limit them to merely reporting information officially authorised for release.
Major outlets, including The New York Times, The Washington Post and CNN, have said they will not agree to the new guidelines, citing concerns it could severely undermine press freedom.
‘Stop meddling’
“Decapitating those organisations” — the Army and Air Force’s Judge Advocate General (JAG) corps — “was an easy way for Hegseth to send a strong message from the outset and put the entire JAG corps on notice,” a defence official familiar with his thinking told CNN.
The seeds for this crisis were sown earlier this year, when Berger expressed reservations about using Texas National Guard soldiers for immigration operations, questioning whether troops had received appropriate training for such duties.
He was promptly told by the Pentagon’s acting general counsel, Charlie Young, to stop “meddling” in state affairs.
When Berger’s team subsequently raised questions about the legality of sacking thousands of probationary Defence Department employees, a scheme promoted by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, Young refused to engage, insisting he would only speak with top civilian lawyers.
The situation deteriorated rapidly after a right-wing social media account accused Berger of violating Hegseth’s anti-diversity policies, and both officers were dismissed within a week.
Hegseth’s antipathy towards military lawyers is well-documented. In his 2024 book The War on Warriors, he derisively referred to them as “jagoffs” and blamed them for rules of engagement in Iraq that he claimed would “get people killed.”
‘Political litmus tests’
The moves are seen by officials as part of a broader effort to reshape the military, potentially by kicking all transgender troops out, deploying the National Guard to cities over governors’ objections or launching lethal strikes against suspected drug traffickers in the Caribbean.
In selecting replacements, Hegseth’s staff reportedly subjected candidates to what officials termed “political litmus tests,” to check if they agree with former President Joe Biden’s policies interrogating them about their views on Covid-19 vaccine mandates and transgenders in service.
The administration has also downgraded the senior JAG positions from three-star to two-star rank, effectively marginalising their influence and potentially excluding them from crucial decision-making forums.
Recent US military strikes on boats in the Caribbean have sparked particular concern amongst Pentagon lawyers, with multiple sources suggesting the operations may lack proper legal authorisation.
Defence Department lawyers are reportedly deferring to a classified Justice Department opinion, which says that the president is legally permitted to order the deadly attacks on the boats based on an argument that the US is in the midst of an armed conflict with cartels, CNN reported.
Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell denied any internal dissent, claiming the department stands on “firm legal ground.”
However, sources paint a starkly different picture of an institution where legal oversight is being systematically undermined.
“The rule of law at the Defence Department has been under assault since day one of this administration,” one serving JAG officer told CNN.
Published in Dawn, October 16th, 2025
