Senator Elissa Slotkin (D-Michigan) has revealed that she is the subject of a federal investigation tied to a political video she and several other lawmakers released last year, a move she describes as politically motivated intimidation by the Trump administration.
Slotkin — a former CIA analyst and military veteran — disclosed Wednesday that officials from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, led by Jeanine Pirro, reached out seeking to interview her about the 90-second video she posted on her social media account last November.
In the video, Slotkin and five other lawmakers — all with military or national security backgrounds — urged members of the U.S. armed forces to refuse orders they believed to be unlawful, emphasizing that Americans who serve have a duty to uphold the Constitution and the rule of law.
From January 6th:
Original “seditious” video:
Slotkin says the inquiry stemmed from that video, and she portrayed the action as a tactic to discourage critics from speaking out. “This is the president’s playbook,” she said, asserting that “truth doesn’t matter, facts don’t matter, and anyone who disagrees with him becomes an enemy.”
President Donald Trump and his allies have publicly denounced the video, labeling the lawmakers’ message “seditious.” Trump even suggested on social media that such rhetoric could warrant the most severe penalties — including the death penalty — though White House officials later clarified that he was speaking rhetorically and not proposing actual execution.
The involvement of the U.S. Attorney’s Office — with Pirro, a former media personality and current federal prosecutor, at the helm — represents a notable escalation compared with earlier contacts the participants received from the FBI. In November, other lawmakers in the video also reported FBI outreach as part of an inquiry.
The inquiry has sparked significant public controversy, with critics arguing that using prosecutorial power against a sitting U.S. senator for issuing a political statement sets a dangerous precedent for free speech and the separation of powers. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has also drawn criticism for initiating separate action against Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Arizona) — another video participant — by attempting to retroactively demote him in military rank, a move Kelly has legally challenged as unconstitutional.
Slotkin, who won a competitive Senate race in 2024 and delivered the Democratic response to President Trump’s 2025 congressional address, has faced heightened security concerns since the exchange of video and reaction. She reported that she and Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colorado) received death threats, prompting increased Capitol Police protection and prompting authorities to investigate threats against their families.
While it is not yet clear what laws — if any — prosecutors believe may have been violated based on the video message alone, the situation underscores the growing tensions between political speech and legal boundaries in an intensely polarized national climate.
Opposition voices argue that if political speech by elected officials can trigger formal investigations, it could chill legitimate debate and dissent — hallmarks of American democracy. Advocates for the inquiry contend that if statements risk undermining military discipline or encouraging unlawful conduct, they deserve scrutiny.
