Guardrails at Home: Admiral Mike Mullen on Keeping the Military Apolitical
JUDJ-Prepared Summary from August 20, 2025 | War, Peace and the American Future: Insights From a Former Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The views and opinions expressed in this blog are those of the speaker.
In a recent America at a Crossroads discussion, Admiral Mike Mullen—retired Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and former Chief of Naval Operations—joined journalist Warren Olney to examine where the line should be drawn between lawful domestic deployments and the long-term health of America’s civil–military compact. Drawing on 43 years of service, Mullen reflected on the National Guard’s expanding role at home, the risks of politicization, and what elected leaders—not the military—must do to keep faith with the Constitution.
The Legal vs. the Wise
Mullen was clear: many recent actions involving the National Guard are legal. Presidents can federalize state Guard units; the Insurrection Act exists; and armed troops can be deployed under certain authorities. But legality is not the only test. “Legal,” he warned, “isn’t the same as wise” when missions place uniformed service members in close, tense contact with civilians. The Guard, he noted, is not primarily trained for policing; when troops are deployed with weapons in domestic settings, the odds of a tragic incident rise.
Governors, Federalization, and Who Decides
Day-to-day, governors command their state Guard and are closest to local realities. Yet federalization can override state authority, creating friction between national directives and local control. Citing recent political clashes over sending Guard units into particular cities, Mullen stressed how polarized narratives obscure basic facts on the ground. That polarization, he argued, makes it harder for citizens to discern what’s truly happening and increases the stakes of any misstep.
Staying Apolitical by Design
At the core of Mullen’s message: America’s military must remain apolitical, institutionally and culturally. Service members swear an oath to the Constitution, not to an individual leader. When the public perceives the armed forces as aligned with one party or person, trust in the institution erodes. Mullen voiced concern about proposals to create specialized Guard units across all 50 states for civil disturbances—not because they’re unlawful, but because they signal a drift toward law-enforcement roles that can blur essential boundaries.
Training, Accountability, and Hard Calls
What if a service member witnesses misconduct by partner agencies during a domestic mission? Mullen’s answer was straightforward: report it up the chain of command. And if a clearly illegal order were issued? He expects professionals to refuse and, if necessary, to resign. His confidence in today’s senior military leaders remains strong, but he emphasized that civilian political leaders must shoulder the responsibility of resolving disputes before the military is placed in untenable positions.
Learning from History Without Repeating It
Domestic deployments are not new. From Little Rock in 1957 to Los Angeles in 1992 to episodes in recent years, presidents and governors have used military forces at home during crises. The lesson, Mullen suggested, is prudence: use the tool sparingly, narrowly, and with painstaking care. The Guard excels at catastrophe response—fires, floods, hurricanes—missions for which it trains and equips. Turning it routinely toward crowd control or policing tasks risks both operational misalignment and public trust.
Citizens and Leaders: Keeping the Compact
For Mullen, the ultimate guardrail is democratic engagement. The American people chose their leaders; now they must hold them accountable for how domestic security is achieved—through measured policy, not military overreach. “We take an oath to the Constitution,” he reminded, and maintaining that oath’s spirit requires elected officials to find solutions that don’t draw the military into partisan crossfire. Citizens, too, have a role: move beyond shouting at the television and press representatives for strategies that keep communities safe while keeping the military out of politics.
The message is sober but hopeful: with restraint, transparency, and civic pressure on policymakers, the nation can keep its soldiers out of the political arena—and keep faith with the Constitution they serve.
About America at a Crossroads
Since April 2020, America at a Crossroads has produced weekly virtual programs on topics related to the preservation of our democracy, voting rights, freedom of the press, and a wide array of civil rights, including abortion rights, free speech, and free press. America at a Crossroads is a project of Jews United for Democracy & Justice.