Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s indifference to the Constitution and American law, as well as his disdain for “tepid legality” as the governing standard for the use of U.S. military power, places him at sharp odds with those who founded this nation and held the office of the Presidency. John Quincy Adams, after serving as secretary of state and president, said, “the war power is strictly constitutional.” Like his predecessors in the nation’s highest office, Adams fully understood that the president’s authority over foreign relations was no less circumscribed than the domestic powers conferred by the Constitution.

Opinion

Hegseth’s blithe disregard of law is unbecoming of a constitutional officer whose authority exists only by virtue of that vested in his office by the Constitution, which he has sworn an oath to uphold, and such powers as Congress, to which he is legally accountable and subject to  removal through impeachment, may choose to confer upon him. Hegseth’s arrogant dismissal of legal boundaries invites the scale of scorn that the founders reserved for usurpers, those who abused power and obstructed justice, beginning with King George III, whom they singled out in the Declaration of Independence as a tyrant.

Hegseth’s enthusiasm for President Donald Trump’s executive order changing the name of “Department of Defense” to the “Department of War” was reflected in his slam-poetry-like explanation of the rebranding as not just a name change, but a shift in attitude, posture and strategy. Hegseth said the war department is “going to go on offense, not just defense. Maximum lethality, not tepid legality. Violent effect, not politically correct.” Successful prosecution of wars always has been, and always will be, the goal of our armed forces, but it is critical to recall that war, from its commencement to its conclusion, must be conducted in accord with the Constitution and applicable laws. On this point, the founders, and judicial rulings issued at the dawn of the republic, were crystal clear. 

Respect for the Constitution and its allocation of the war power to Congress, fortified by the presidential oath of office and the Article II duty “to take care to faithfully execute the laws,” informed the decisions of founding presidents when questions of war and military hostilities arose. No early president — Jefferson, Madison and Monroe, for example —  shared Hegseth’s disdain for legality.

In 1801, and again in 1805, President Jefferson, faced with military threats from Tripoli and Spain, respectively, refused to go on “offense,” when, “considering that Congress alone is constitutionally invested with changing our condition from peace to war, I have thought it my duty to await their authority for using force.” The threat of invasion did not stop Jefferson from consultation with Congress. 

President Madison, the chief architect of the Constitution, reiterated the constitutional governance of the use of force on June 1, 1812, when he called attention to the English attacks on American shipping. He referred to Congress the question of whether we should oppose “force to force in defense of our national rights,” which he said, was a “solemn question which the Constitution wisely confides to the legislative department of the Government.” 

After the adoption of the Monroe Doctrine, Colombia sought protection from France in 1824. President Monroe, who was a delegate to the Virginia Convention, stated, “The Executive has no right to compromise the nation in any question of war.” He echoed Secretary of State Adams, who declared that the Constitution vests that power in Congress, alone.

Chief Justice John Marshall, a vigorous participant in the Virginia Ratification Convention, stated in Talbot v. Seeman (1801): “The whole power of war being, by the Constitution vested in Congress, the acts of that body can alone be resorted to as our guides in this inquiry.” There was no departure from this understanding in the crisis of the Civil War. In the Prize Cases (1862), the high court held: “By the Constitution, Congress alone has the power to declare a national or foreign war.” The president, “has no power to initiate or declare war against a foreign nation or a domestic State. If a war be made by invasion of a foreign nation, the president is bound to resist force by force. He does not initiate the war but is bound to accept the challenge.”

In matters of war and peace, the founders, unlike Secretary Hegseth, demonstrated respect, not disdain, for legality.

David Gray Adler is president of The Alturas Institute, a nonprofit educational organization created to defend American democracy by promoting the Constitution, civic education, equal protection and...

Join the Conversation

12 Comments

WyoFile's goal is to provide readers with information and ideas that foster constructive conversations about the issues and opportunities our communities face. One small piece of how we do that is by offering a space below each story for readers to share perspectives, experiences and insights. For this to work, we need your help.

What we're looking for: 

  • Your real name — first and last. 
  • Direct responses to the article. Tell us how your experience relates to the story.
  • The truth. Share factual information that adds context to the reporting.
  • Thoughtful answers to questions raised by the reporting or other commenters.
  • Tips that could advance our reporting on the topic.
  • No more than three comments per story, including replies. 

What we block from our comments section, when we see it:

  • Pseudonyms. WyoFile stands behind everything we publish, and we expect commenters to do the same by using their real name.
  • Comments that are not directly relevant to the article. 
  • Demonstrably false claims, what-about-isms, references to debunked lines of rhetoric, professional political talking points or links to sites trafficking in misinformation.
  • Personal attacks, profanity, discriminatory language or threats.
  • Arguments with other commenters.

Other important things to know: 

  • Appearing in WyoFile’s comments section is a privilege, not a right or entitlement. 
  • We’re a small team and our first priority is reporting. Depending on what’s going on, comments may be moderated 24 to 48 hours from when they’re submitted — or even later. If you comment in the evening or on the weekend, please be patient. We’ll get to it when we’re back in the office.
  • We’re not interested in managing squeaky wheels, and even if we wanted to, we don't have time to address every single commenter’s grievance. 
  • Try as we might, we will make mistakes. We’ll fail to catch aliases, mistakenly allow folks to exceed the comment limit and occasionally miss false statements. If that’s going to upset you, it’s probably best to just stick with our journalism and avoid the comments section.
  • We don’t mediate disputes between commenters. If you have concerns about another commenter, please don’t bring them to us.

The bottom line:

If you repeatedly push the boundaries, make unreasonable demands, get caught lying or generally cause trouble, we will stop approving your comments — maybe forever. Such moderation decisions are not negotiable or subject to explanation. If civil and constructive conversation is not your goal, then our comments section is not for you. 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. An opinion piece that left me asking the question… what is unconstitutional here?

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/09/restoring-the-united-states-department-of-war/

    The Secretary of Defense was given a lawful order by the President of the United States.

    The Secretary’s comments were actually. “It’s restoring, as you’ve guided us to, Mr. President, restoring the warrior ethos. The War Department is going to fight decisively, not endless conflicts. It’s going to fight to win, not not to lose. We’re going to go on offense, not just on defense. Maximum lethality, not tepid legality. Violent effect, not politically correct. We’re going to raise up warriors, not just defenders.”

    I would really like to see a declaration of war rather than police actions carried out halfheartedly and endlessly.

    The author did not show what was unconstitutional on the part of the Secretary. If anything, I see the president defending the nation when threats are brought to the US. And the Secretary building a warrior culture that is designed to ward off attacks upon the country. If we were to find ourselves needing to go to war, and Congress declares a war, as in the examples given in the executive order, then I want the military envisioned by the President and the Secretary to carry it out.

  2. If this author had taken a little more time to research this article rather than just spouting liberal talking points the article would never have been written. When this country was founded the Defense Department was known as the War Department, all Trump did was change it back to its original name. Under the patriot Act the president is allowed to pursue terrorists wherever they may be and use deadly force if necessary. He is also allowed to use the military for up to 90 days without congressional approval, this was granted when a democrat was in office and had a majority in both houses. So everything he is doing is well is well within the rule of law and the orders Hegseth is following are all lawful orders. I expected more from Wyofile than to publish such misinformed diatribe as what this opinion is.

      1. Fentanyl, among other illicit substances comes to mind that have killed more Americans in one year under Biden than all of the Americans that died in LBJ’s Vietnam War.

  3. Of course, everything in this article tells the story of the Trump administration and his minions. America is corrupted through and through.

      1. There has always been corruption. Under dumpy its orders of magnitude greater. By the way, you’re pretty corrupt yourself Chad/jack/ Doug or who else you may be. You’re a trump bot.

        1. Obama expanded the GWOT from 2 countries at least 6 during his term. His administration oversaw the engineered color revolution in 2014 to overthrow the elected Government of the Ukraine.
          All these actions were for the enrichment of the M.I.C.
          Trump expanded the Syrian eventual coup of Assad, and ignoring his theatrics has never stopped further billions in military spending to the Ukraine.
          They ALL shouldve been impeached, including Trump.
          not the words of a “trump bot”.

  4. Trump rules buy fear and intimidation, congress is spineless , freedom of speech is now being challenged buy our new dictator.

  5. The Dept. Of Defense is a marketing term that was introduced in the infancy of Military Industrial Complex.
    “Defense” spending is so much more palatable than War spending during times of peace. Therefore Americans just blindly accept 10s and eventually 100s of TRILLIONS of dollars taken for Death and Destruction.
    This crime against the people of our country has been a Bipartisan commission in the District of Criminals. Republicans and Democrats share equal responsibility for bowing time and again to the M.I.C.