WASHINGTON (AP) — Democratic legislators featured in a social media clip encouraging U.S. military personnel to defy “illegal orders” have reported contact from the FBI to arrange interviews, indicating a potential investigation into their actions.

This development would be the second probe related to the video, following the Pentagon’s announcement of a review concerning Democratic Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona for possible breaches of military law. The FBI and Pentagon’s involvement follows allegations from President Donald Trump, who accused the lawmakers of sedition and noted that it is “punishable by DEATH” in a social media comment.

These investigations represent an unusual intensification by federal law enforcement and military bodies, which typically avoid political disputes. They also highlight the administration’s readiness to stretch legal boundaries to confront dissent, even when it involves elected congressional members. The lawmakers in the video advocated for military personnel to refuse orders they deemed illegal, a responsibility already inherent in military duty.

A group of four Democratic House representatives issued a statement on Tuesday, asserting, “President Trump is wielding the FBI as a means to intimidate and harass Members of Congress. Yesterday, the FBI reached out to the House and Senate Sergeants at Arms to schedule interviews.”

Democrats call inquiry a ‘scare tactic’

Michigan Senator Elissa Slotkin, one of the six Democrats in the video, informed reporters on Tuesday that “last night, the FBI’s counterterrorism division messaged the members of Congress, indicating they are initiating what seems to be an investigation against the six of us.” Slotkin described this as a “scare tactic by” Trump.

“Whether you agree with the video or don’t agree with the video, the question to me is: is this the appropriate response for a president of the United States to go after and seek to weaponize the federal government against those he disagrees with?” said Slotkin.

The group of four Democratic House members said in their statement that “no amount of intimidation or harassment will ever stop us from doing our jobs and honoring our Constitution.”

All six of the Democratic lawmakers in the video have served in the military or intelligence community.

Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska criticized both inquiries on social media, saying that accusing the lawmakers “of treason and sedition for rightfully pointing out that servicemembers can refuse illegal orders is reckless and flat-out wrong.”

“The Department of Defense and FBI surely have more important priorities than this frivolous investigation,” wrote Murkowski.

FBI provides no insight into interview requests

The FBI went through the top security officials for the House and Senate to request interviews with each of the six lawmakers. The lawmakers said they had no further information and the FBI has not made clear on what basis they were seeking the interviews.

The FBI declined to comment Tuesday, but Director Kash Patel, in an interview with journalist Catherine Herridge, described it as an “ongoing matter” in explaining why he could not discuss details.

Asked for his reaction to the video, Patel said, “What goes through my head is the same thing that goes through my head in any case: is there a lawful predicate to open up an inquiry and investigation, or is there not? And that decision will be made by the career agents and analysts here at the FBI.”

The video at the heart of the inquiries

In the video, lawmakers said they needed troops to “stand up for our laws … our Constitution.” Kelly, who was a fighter pilot before becoming an astronaut and then retiring at the rank of captain, told troops that “you can refuse illegal orders.”

After the Pentagon announced the investigation into Kelly on Monday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth referred it to the Navy on Tuesday and requested a briefing by Dec. 10.

The lawmakers didn’t mention specific circumstances in the video. But at an event Tuesday in Michigan, Slotkin pointed to the Trump administration ordering the military to blow up small boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean accused of ferrying drugs and continued attempts at deploying National Guard troops into U.S. cities despite some legal setbacks.

“It wasn’t that there was any one incident, it was the sheer number of people coming to us and saying, ‘I’m worried. I am being sent to Washington or I’m being sent to LA or Chicago, North Carolina now, and I’m concerned I’m going to be asked to do something that I don’t know if I should do,’” said Slotkin. “So that’s where it came from.”

Troops, especially uniformed commanders, do have specific obligations to reject orders that are unlawful, if they make that determination.

Broad legal precedence also holds that just following orders — colloquially known as the “Nuremberg defense,” as it was used unsuccessfully by senior Nazi officials to justify their actions under Adolf Hitler — doesn’t absolve troops.