General Mark Milley Says He Fears He Will Be Court-Martialled

Retired US Army General Mark A. Milley said he fears he could be recalled to active duty and court-martialled—a startling claim that underscores the deep tensions between senior military leadership and former President Donald J. Trump’s political circle. The Guardian+1
In this article we’ll cover what Milley said, why it matters, the historical and legal context for such a scenario, and what its implications are for civil-military relations in the U.S.

What Milley Said

According to excerpts from a forthcoming book by veteran journalist Bob Woodward, Milley warned former colleagues that he feared a return to active duty and subsequent court-martial if Trump were to win the presidency again. The Guardian+2Strategic Study India+2
In the book’s account:

Milley referred to Trump as “a total fascist… the most dangerous person to this country.” The Washington Post+1
He said Trump is “a walking, talking advertisement of what he’s going to try to do,” referencing a White House meeting where Trump reportedly threatened to recall and court-martial retired officers. The Guardian+1
Milley reportedly told colleagues he was taking serious protective measures: death threats, security concerns, precautionary steps at his home. The Washington Post+1

Put simply: a former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (the top uniformed military officer in the U.S.) publicly expressing fear of being court-martialled if a former President returns to office is extraordinary.

Why This Statement Is Significant

This matter matters on several levels:

1. Civil-military relations
The U.S. tradition holds that the military is subordinate to civilian leadership—it’s a core pillar of constitutional government. When a top uniformed officer expresses fear of punitive action by an elected official’s return, that suggests a breakdown in that tradition.

2. Precedent and norm-setting
While retired officers can still face review, the notion of recalling them for court-martial based on political retaliation is highly unusual. The book excerpts suggest that discussions of recalling retired officers such as William H. McRaven or Stanley McChrystal had occurred under Trump. southparkdems.org+1 If such a path were followed, it could set precedent for politicizing the military justice system.

3. Personal stakes and credibility of leadership
Milley’s public expression of fear reflects the personal risk felt by senior officers in that environment. It also raises questions about how senior leadership sees the protection of officers and their ability to act in the national interest in volatile political climates.

4. The broader politicization of institutions
That this issue is emerging in the context of a major book by Woodward and is drawing mainstream attention indicates how deeply the themes of loyalty, chain of command, and political interference are now part of the national conversation.

Legal & Historical Context

What does it mean for a retired general to fear court-martial, and how plausible is such a scenario?

Court-martial basics
Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), court-martial is the military’s criminal trial process. Normally, it is used for active duty service members; however, retired officers remain subject to UCMJ in some cases if they retain their commission and become subject to recall. Judicial Watch

Recalled to active duty
In rare instances, retired officers can be recalled to active duty and then face military justice proceedings. The aforementioned critiques of Milley reference Article 32 hearings (an equivalent to a civilian grand jury) as a possible precursor to court-martial. Judicial Watch

Historical precedent
One of the more famous examples is Brigadier General Billy Mitchell, who in 1925 was court-martialled after openly criticizing Army leadership and government policy on aviation. Judicial Watch But such cases are exceptionally rare in modern times, especially at the level of a Chairman of the Joint Chiefs.

The Milley situation

Milley retired in 2023 after a long career; he is no longer on active duty.
On 28 January 2025, the Pentagon announced his security clearance and protective detail had been revoked, and the Defense Department Inspector General was tasked with reviewing his conduct. The Washington Post+1
Importantly: According to multiple reports, former President Joseph R. Biden on his last day in office issued a pre-emptive pardon to Milley (along with others) to protect against politically-motivated prosecutions. This would block federal civilian or military prosecutions for those offenses covered by the pardon. Wikipedia+2New York Post+2

Hence, while Milley professes fear of court-martial, the legal window for prosecution seems narrower—especially given the pardon. But his concern seems rooted not just in what is legally feasible, but what could happen in a different political environment.

What Are the Allegations/Triggers?

Why would Milley fear this? The book and other reporting point to several flashpoints in his tenure and post-service:

Calls to Chinese counterpart: In the days around the January 6 United States Capitol attack, Milley contacted his counterpart in China, Li Zuocheng, to reassure that the U.S. would not strike China. These calls provoked sharp criticism from Trump and his allies, who accused Milley of undermining the chain of command. PBS+2The Independent+2
Lafayette Square photo op: In 2020, after the killing of George Floyd, Trump ordered demonstrators cleared near the White House. Milley later said his presence beside the president created the perception of the military being involved in domestic politics—a perception he said was a mistake. Capstone+1
Public criticisms of Trump: After retiring, Milley was quoted as calling Trump “a total fascist” and “the most dangerous person to this country.” Such remarks increase his exposure to political backlash. The Washington Post+1
Threats and security concerns: Reports say Milley faced death threats and installed bullet-proof glass and blast-proof curtains at his home. The Washington Post
Threats of recall and court-martial: The book recounts that Trump once told Milley and his then–Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper that he might recall retired officers and court-martial them if they criticized him. Milley interpreted this as part of his fear of potential retaliation. southparkdems.org

How Real Is The Risk?

Is Milley’s fear justified? The answer is nuanced.

Legal hurdles

The president cannot unilaterally recall a retired general for court-martial without following procedure.
A recall and court-martial would require due process under the UCMJ, including establishing jurisdiction, charges, an Article 32 hearing, etc.
Milley’s pardon by President Biden offers protection from many forms of prosecution, though administrative or de-gradation actions remain theoretically possible.
Reports of the Pentagon removing his security clearance and detail suggest administrative measures rather than outright prosecution. The Washington Post+1

Political risk and perception

Even if a court-martial is unlikely, the fear serves as a warning: senior officers feel vulnerable if they run afoul of an elected official’s ire.
The optics of recalling a former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs for court-martial could be profoundly destabilizing for civil-military norms.

What would trigger it?
In the scenario Milley described, a re-elected Trump returns and uses executive or departmental leverage to target former senior officials. While speculative, it points to a broader point: a politicized pathway exists—even if not the norm.

Implications Going Forward

The situation raises a number of implications for how the U.S. military, the presidency, and the broader democratic system operate.

1. Chilling effect on senior military leadership
If senior officers believe they may be targeted for retaliation, that could affect how they give candid military advice, how they align with civilian leadership, and how they navigate policy. The willingness of military leaders to speak truth to power may be diminished.

2. Erosion of norms and the chain of command
A healthy civil-military relationship requires that the military accepts civilian control while also that the president respects the non-political professional role of the armed forces. When this dynamic breaks down—when military voices are perceived as political actors or when the president is seen as punishing military officers for political reasons—norms suffer.

3. Institutional trust and cohesion
Such a public feud invites division: between officers loyal to the institution vs. officers loyal to a political patron; between retired officers and active duty; between those cautious of speaking out and those willing to do so. These divisions can undermine military cohesion and public trust.

4. Precedent for politicized justice within the military
Even the prospect of using military justice as a tool of politics is dangerous. If recalled-court-martial becomes a credible threat for political dissent, the military justice system could cease to function as intended.

5. The upcoming election and leadership changes matter
The statement by Milley came in the context of a possible Trump return—and his assertions about danger, recall, and punishment suggest that leadership transitions matter not just at the white house, but at the Pentagon, the armed forces, and the broader national security apparatus.

What to Watch

For American readers curious about this evolving story, here are key things to keep an eye on:

Inspection or investigation outcomes: The Pentagon’s Inspector General is reportedly reviewing Milley’s conduct—will this lead to any administrative action (demotion, stripping of rank, etc.)? The American Legion+1
Political rhetoric: Will Trump or his circle explicitly target military officers for recall or punitive action? Even rhetorical threats matter.
Policy or legislative action: Congress may step in to clarify protections for retired senior officers, or to regulate recall/court-martial provisions.
Active duty vs retired personnel treatment: How the military treats current vs former seniors may set precedent.
Public and military reaction: How do active duty officers, veterans, the public respond to the idea a former Chairman fears being prosecuted? Will trust in the military or the presidency suffer?

Final Thoughts

General Mark Milley’s fear of being court-martialled is more than a personal worry—it’s a signal. A signal that the boundaries between politics and the military, between civilian oversight and military professionalism, may be under stress.

His comments remind us that the U.S. civil-military compact is fragile—not because of imminent coups or military insurrection, but because the norms that undergird it—respect for civilian leadership, military non-partisanship, protection for professional dissent, institutional independence—can be eroded when politics dominates.

Whether or not Milley is ever recalled, demoted, or court-martialled, the real question is: how the system will respond, how the institutions will hold, and what the message will be—to senior officers, to policymakers, and to the American public—about the role of the military in democracy.